The trial continued against the testing of Act No. 36 of 2009 on Health (Health Act) was held back by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Friday (20/7) at the Plenary Court Room. Cases registered by the Clerk of this Court with a number 63/PUU-X/2012 filed by HF Abraham Amos and Johny Bakar.

In the trial of this improvement, the applicant is without represented by legal counsel, said the petition was correct. Amos explains why the request has been repaired. "Well, as for the core than we request this matter, nothing else is not only related directly to the Article 172 paragraph (1), subsection 170 (2), then in the noncommercial system is contained in Article 171 paragraph (3) and paragraph (2) which we discuss in substantially the inserting fund 5% of the active workers and 10% for provinces and cities, we think that there is injustice. We take the example that even now active workers who already have a salary was also in accordance with the budget, it flattened out, so we feel that here there is injustice in the distribution of postal budget devoted to health budgets. So maybe this is where a substantive issue, so we filed a judicial review of this," he said in front of the judges of the Constitutional Court, chaired by Hamdan Zoelva.

At trial, the judges are also members of the Constitutional Justice Maria Farida Indrati and Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi endorsed some of the evidence. "Then you present evidence, P is it? P-1 through P-29, evidence has been verified by the Court, therefore, are considered valid proof. Petitioner brothers, hearing these days is done for a preliminary hearing. Furthermore you are just waiting for the next session of the Court to call. For this case it will report to the Plenary Assembly RPH Assembly to determine the continuation of this case because it’s waiting for you just call the next session of the Court, whether the later will be brought to the plenary or it could be in many cases can also be directly terminated, but it really depends on the decision RPH," said Hamdan.

In his petition, the Petitioner felt that their constitutional rights violated by the enactment of Article 170 paragraph (3), Article 171 paragraph (3) is applied will cause potential harm to the applicant and the workers do not remain passive income or active income workers and the poor remain poor and The Chronic Disease Disabled Patients are generally due to the allocation of funds is not in place and the contradictions of Law Number 22 Year 2011 on Income and Expenditure Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 figures (2), the General Allocation Fund (DAU) and figures (3) Allocation of Funds (DAK) letter (b) Health, where the allocation of funds amounting to Rp. 3,005,931,000,000.00. (Three trillion five billion nine hundred and thirty one million dollars) earmarked for public health services.

According to the applicant, the public health service Non-Commercial only a complementary tool that is still contained in a political dilemma and only an "illusion" or "The poor and sick in this country banned" because in general the status of the poor and disabled people cannot afford to income mediocre difficult to obtain optimal health services according to the principles of a just and civilized humanity and equal before the law. (Lulu Anjarsari / mh/Yazid.tr)