Against interpreted as a request for political parties proposed by a group of people, labor groups, farmers groups, urban poor groups, functional group all the people of Indonesia, according to the National People’s Congress, which was attended by group delegates, so it makes no sense and is not likely arranged technically within the party system.

The existence of political parties is the channeling of public aspirations is universally applicable and is already providing a place for factions referred to by the applicant. Therefore, these factions should be able to determine their own choice to join a political party whose existence has been authorized by law.

It was thus considered part of the Constitutional Court (MK) who decides the petition Sri Sudarjo as Petitioner No. 42/2008 on the General Election of President and Vice President - Case No. 4/PUU-XI/2013 which cannot be accepted and rejected, Tuesday (26/3) afternoon at the Plenary Court Courtroom.

The applicant argued that Article 1 paragraph 2, Article 9, Article 10 paragraph (1), and Article 14 paragraph (2) Law no. 42/2008 contrary to Article 1 Paragraph (2), Article 6A Paragraph (1), Article 27 paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1), and Article 28 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. Petitioners argue that section and / or paragraph petitioned state have restrictions, no room to give birth to a leader comes from the people, that the people acting as sovereign.

Article 1 paragraph 2, Article 9, Article 10 paragraph (1), and Article 14 paragraph (2) of Law 42/2008 petitioned for by the applicant been tested and decided by the Court in previous decisions of the Decision No.. 51-52-59/PUU-VI/2008 dated February 18, 2009, Decision No.. 56/PUU-VI/2008 dated February 17, 2009, and Decision No.. 26/PUU-VII/2009 dated 14 September 2009. Constitutional rights have been impaired Petitioner argued in the foregoing matters are also based on the provisions of article and / or the same paragraph with the 1945 Constitution as the basis of testing by the Petitioner in the petition a quo, except for the constitutional rights of the Petitioner stipulated in Article 27 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

Based on consideration of differences in the basis of the test and / or constitutional grounds argued by the Petitioner a quo, according to the Court, the petition does not include a plea of ne bis in idem, and therefore Article 1 paragraph 2, Article 9, Article 10 paragraph (1), and Article 14 paragraph (2) of Act 42/2008 to be re-examined on the basis of Article 27 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

"Thus, as far as the testing rounds of Article 1 Paragraph (2), Article 6A Paragraph (1), Article 28D paragraph (1) and Article 28 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution is ne bis in idem," said Anwar Usman read the opinion of the Court

According to the Court, section and / or paragraph petitioned for constitutionality by the applicant essentially governs the system of the General Election of President and Vice President, especially the mechanisms of candidacy or nominating candidates for President and Vice President by a political party, a political party according to the Petitioner is not representative of the entire groups in society.

"While Article 27 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution sets out the rights of citizens to life, in the context of employment and decent livelihood for humanity. Therefore, the provisions of Article 27 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution did not set up the same thing with the provisions of chapter and / or verse Law. 42/2008 petitioned constitutionality, so that Article 27 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution is not appropriate or relevant to be used as the basis for testing in case a quo," said Anwar Usman.

"The verdict hearing, the petition for the constitutionality of Article 1 paragraph 2, Article 9, Article 10 paragraph (1), and Article 14 paragraph (2) of Law no. 42/2008 on the General Election of President and Vice President of Article 1 paragraph (2), Article 6A Paragraph (1), Article 28D paragraph (1) and Article 28 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution cannot be accepted. Furthermore, the application of testing the constitutionality of Article 1 paragraph 2, Article 9, Article 10 paragraph (1), and Article 14 paragraph (2) Law no. 42/2008 on the General Election of President and Vice President of Article 27 Paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution was rejected," it read by Chief Justice of the Plenary Mahfud MD, accompanied by other constitutional judges. (Nano Tresna Arfana / mh)