The controversy developed in the community about the causes of Sidoarjo mud disaster, which is due to improper drilling operations and natural disasters. According to Prof. R.P. Koesoemadinata, the Sidoarjo mud volcano is not a natural phenomenon. "The answer is obvious that this is not a natural phenomenon," said Koesoemadinata in his capacity as an expert presented by the applicant in the proceedings in the Constitutional Court (MK), Tuesday (07/07/2012) afternoon. Session times for the fourth test case number 53/PUU-X/2012 particulars of Article 19 of Law Number 22 Year 2011 on the State Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 (Budget Act 2012) and Article 18 of Law Number 4 Year 2012 on Amendment to Law Number 22 Year 2011 on the State Budget for Fiscal Year 2012 (the Act APBNP 2012), heard the testimony of the applicant's expert.

The mud volcano in Sidoarjo, bright Koesoemadinata, is similar to the natural phenomenon, but it is difficult to explain because its natural. Sidoarjo mud flow are closely related to the difficulties experienced Banjar Panji disposal wells. "Thus, the well Sidoarjo mud volcano in a clear and straightforward due to the mishandling of Banjar Panji disposal wells," said Prof. R.P. Koesoemadinata.

Besides Prof. R.P. Koesoemadinata, the applicant also presented expert Ir. Sumanta and Aidul Kersam Fitriciada. According Kersam, Sidoarjo mud disaster caused by faulty gas exploration drilling operations at wells 1 Banjar latticework. Kersam mention the main mistake made by the operator (the company Lapindo Berantas Inc.) which do not carry out the installation of casing (casing) 95/8 "as defined in the drilling program has been agreed by stakeholders and approved by BP Migas.

"In the relationship between the KKS (Cooperation Contract) with the government, a watchdog BP Migas operations, managing the operation of the KKS. The entire new program could be implemented if the program was agreed by the partners of the company and the latter must have the approval of BP Migas. What is not clear in this case, if the change means they do not comply with the program, already approved by BP Migas or not? If not then all costs will be his own responsibility, "he explained.

For information, testing of the State Budget Law 2012 Article 19 and Article 18 of Law APBNP 2012, filed by Lieutenant-General in March (Ret.) Suharto, DR. H. Tjuk Sukiadi Kasturi, and Azhar Ali Akbar. The applicant objected to the Sidoarjo mud handling charged to the state budget. Article 18 states: "To facilitate efforts to control mud in Sidoarjo, the allocation of funds in the Sidoarjo Mudflow Handling Agency (BPLS) Fiscal Year 2012, can be used to: (a) Repayment of payments for the land and buildings outside the map area affected in the three villages (Desa Besuki, Kedungcangkring village, and village Pajarakan), (b) Help the contract home, cost of living allowance assistance, evacuation costs and the repayment of deficiency payments for the land and buildings outside the map area affected in nine neighborhoods in the three villages (Siring Village, Village Jatirejo, and Mindi Village), (c) Help the contract home, living allowance assistance, evacuation costs and the payment of the purchase of land and buildings in areas outside the affected area map other established through Presidential Decree." (Nur Rosihin Ana / mh/Yazid.tr)