About 60 students of the Faculty of Law, University of Ibn Khaldun Bogor, West Java, accompanied by Dean of Faculty of Law as well as several visiting professors Constitutional Court (MK), Monday (14/1) afternoon. Their visit was welcomed by Constitutional Justice Muhammad Alim in the Press Conference Room, 4th floor of the building MK, Jakarta.

On the occasion, Alim explained briefly about the principles and constitutional law state the Court owned. "State of Indonesia is a country where the law of sovereignty in the hands of the people and implemented in accordance with the Constitution," said Alim.

According to him, justice is not identical with the law. The law is not justice leveler while. "Applying that justice should not generalize," he said.

Furthermore, the authority of the Constitutional Court explained Alim. There were four Court’s authorities. First, test legislation against the Constitution which is called the constitutional review. Then both the prosecuting authority disputes the authority of state institutions whose authorities’ constitution granted.

"For example, in the event of a dispute between the DPR and DPD authority, because both institutions the authority granted by the Constitution. In any dispute, all parties felt right. Nevertheless the good guys cannot be determined by the parties," said Alim. In the event that the Court plays determine which agency has the authority under the constitution.

Third, the authority to decide on the dissolution of a political party. And finally, the results of the election dispute. However, there is one authority Alim said that has not been entered in the Court today. Authorities are prosecuting the dissolution of political parties. "All authority has been implemented, but to the authority of the dissolution of a political party no matter which entry in the Constitutional Court, which can be filed only because the government," explained Alim in front of the participants who came from the West Java.

In addition to the authority, said Alim, there are liabilities held by the Constitutional Court, which gave judgment on the opinion of the House that the president and / or vice president has violated the law, or moral turpitude, or do not qualify as the president and / or vice president referred to in 1945 Constitution. For this case, has not been addressed by the Court. (Utami Argawati)