East Barito Regent, Central Kalimantan, Zain Alkim examined the constitutionality of Article 58 letter o Law 32/2004 in conjunction with Law 12/2008 on Regional Government (LG) of the 1945 Constitution to the Constitutional Court (MK). But in its decision, Wednesday (19/9), the Court stated Zain Alkim as Petitioner is unreasonable by law.

"Article 58 letter o Law 32/2004 in conjunction with Law 12/2008 does not conflict with Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 28 paragraph (1) and paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution," the Court said in a ruling No. 60/PUU-X / 2012 is. "Declare to wholly reject the petition," said Moh. Mahfud MD when he became Chairman of the Plenary Session.

In his petition, Petitioner argued that the article was tested against Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 28 paragraph (1) and Article 28 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution. Because, the article with the extensive interpretation by the Court in several decisions has resulted Applicants who currently serves as the District of East Barito has elected two terms in the 2003-2008 period and the 2008-2013 period can not follow the election of District Head East Barito District for a term period of 2013-2018.

"Article a quo has led to the values and meanings that retroactive application of receding or directly harm the Petitioner because the Petitioner," explained principal petition set forth in the Court's decision.

But, said the Court, the provisions of Article 28 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution as the acid test gave a petition to the state obligation to uphold and protect human rights by upholding the principles of the democratic constitutional state must be set and outlined in legislation.

"The requirements that restrict the right to be re-elected for a regional head / deputy head only up to twice as defined in Article 58 letter o Law 32/2004 is in line with the restrictions by the Act in accordance with the provisions of Article 28J paragraph (2) Constitution 1945, "said the Court.

The goal, continued the Court, such as to meet the demands of justice for giving an opportunity to others to be selected as the regional head / deputy head if they meet certain conditions. "This is a consequence of the recognition of a democratic constitutional state based on law, as stressed by Article 1 (2) and paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution," said the Court.

In addition, the provisions of Article 58 letter o Law 32/2004 in conjunction with Law 12/2008, which states, "Candidates for Regional Head and Deputy Head are Indonesian citizens eligible". O Letter stating, "I never served as Regional Head or Deputy Head of Region for 2 (two) times a term in the same office," and also petitioned the Court decided in Decision No. 8/PUU-VI/2008, dated May 6 , 2008; Decision Number 29/PUU-VIII/2010, dated 3 September 2010; Decision Number 33/PUU-VIII/2010, dated 23 September 2010, and Decision No. 76/PUU-VIII/2010, dated March 3, 2011. All of the case was rejected by the Court. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)