Tajul Muluk, Shiite leaders from Sampang regency, Madura, which is now being detained for entangled Article 156a of the Code of Criminal filed to the Constitutional Court. The first hearing on Case No. 84/PUU-X/2012 was held on Friday (14/9) at the Panel Session Court. Together Tajul, there are three other applicant, namely Alaydrus Hassan, Ahmad Hidayat, and Umar Shahab.

In the petition, the Petitioners, the review of Article 156a of the Criminal Code in conjunction with Article 4 of Law no. 1/PNPS 1965 on the Prevention of Abuse and / or blasphemy. According to the Petitioners, their constitutional rights had been impaired by the enactment of Article 156a of the Criminal Code.

Tested in the article reads, "Punishable by imprisonment for ever five years whoever intentionally publicly issued feelings or acts: a. which in principle is hostility, abuse or desecration of a religion followed in Indonesia, b. with the intention that that person did not adopt any religion as well, which is based on Belief in God Almighty. "

"That the Petitioner I (Tajul Muluk, pen) is a victim of the application of Article 156a of the Criminal Code and the use of which has multiple interpretations. Application of Article 156a is very confusing for the Petitioner I. The article applies to the interpretation of such law enforcement agencies as they pleased. Petitioner I have been in the process of the level of investigation, prosecution and trial, and has even been found guilty of committing criminal offenses under Article 156a of the Criminal Code, "said Attorney Petitioner Ahmad Taufik.

According to Taufik, the use of Article 156a of the Criminal Code to the Applicant I is based on an incorrect understanding of the teachings of the Shiite sect of Islam taqiyah. "Errors of taqiyah understanding the Shia sect of Islam religion which is then used to apply Article 156a of the Criminal Code, while there is never a Joint Decree 3 Ministers (Minister of Religion, Minister of the Interior, the Attorney General) which states that teaching heretical and deviant, "he said. "It is extremely harmful and violated the constitutional rights of the Petitioner I."

A school difference in the teachings of Islam, said Taufik, is not new. However, if the difference is to make the person convicted, it is clearly unjust and cruel behavior towards their fellow Muslims. In the case that struck Tajul, he says, is also at least potentially overwriting the other applicant everyday is muballig often conduct studies related to Shia sect.

Finally, the petition, the Petitioner asks the Court to declare Section 156a of the Penal Code against the Constitution conditionally, ie the extent not understood, "must be an order and a stern warning to stop the action on the 3 A Joint Decree of the Minister (Minister of Religious Affairs, the Attorney General, and Minister of the Interior). "

After listening to the points the petition, Justice Panel consists of Justices Constitutional Anwar Usman (Panel Chair), Harjono, and Maria Farida Indrati give some advice to the applicant's attorney. According to Harjono, the Applicant must pay attention to the previous petition has been tested on the same terms. According to him, the reason this time applicant, must be different from the previous request. Because if the same will be declared ne bis in idem. Moreover, according to him, the petition is still too dwell on issues that tested the application of article, not the constitutionality of the norm. (Dodi / mh/Yazid.tr)