Constitutional Court (MK) researcher Abdul Goffar received a visit from 34 students of SMAN 1 Sorolangun in the press conference room, 4th floor, Court House, Monday (8/4). Students in Grades 2 the Department of Science and Social Studies to the Court in the context of a study tour to learn more about MK. Satisfy the curiosity of the students, Abdul Goffar presented material about the functions and authority of the Court.

Abdul Goffar in the presence of uniformed students explained that the state system prior to the 1945 changes, there is the highest institutions and state institutions. System, further Goffar put MPR as the highest state institution. While the House of Representatives, President, MA, CPC, and DPA are in equal position.

At that time, further Goffar, if any dispute or disputes between state institutions theoretically mediated by the Assembly as the highest state institution. However, in practice, when there is a dispute between state institutions mediation was not done. Because in practice, the Assembly is an institution that two-thirds of its members are from the appointment and the appointment by the president. The remaining one-third of the Assembly members’ filled election results that often won by the ruling party at that time. By doing so, the Assembly as the highest state institutions remain "controlled" president.

"MPR may not ultimately be filled with people who are opposed to the president. As a result, although MPR is still the highest state institution of the incumbent president," said Goffar which also conveyed example when President Soeharto resigned, Harmoko who served as Chairman of the Assembly at the time to ask President Soeharto again served as president for the 1998-2003 period before implementation Special Session of the Assembly.

After the 1945 changes, the constitutional system in Indonesia became functional horizontal, not vertical hierarchical. By doing so, the Assembly is no longer the highest state institution but equal with other state agencies. Because of inter-agency position is equal, when there is a dispute in between, it is no longer the highest state institution that mediates. In these conditions, it requires the independent agency authorized to mediate disputes between state agencies through its authority to decide the Dispute between the Authorities of the State Institutions (SKLN).

Goffar then described the authority of the Constitutional Court other, namely the dissolution of political parties. Same as before, Goffar first explained about the history of the emergence of the authority of the Court to decide the dissolution of political parties. Goffar explained that the first authority to dissolve a political party is in government hands. Goffar exampled, the leadership of President Soekarno some political parties are at odds with the president dissolved. Similarly, in the era of President Soeharto to the merger / amalgamation of political parties into two parties namely PDI and nationalist parties to be a nationalist religious party PPP.

The incident became the basis of "migration" authority to dissolve the political party of the government to the Constitutional Court. It was intended to prevent any element of the current political interest dissolve political parties. "There could be a mind to get rid of a rival party bearer party president when elections take place. So it was transferred to the authority of the Court," said Goffar.

The third authority, Goffar further, namely to decide disputes dispute election results. The authority to ensure democratic election process runs. "To embody democratic state, must also be democratic election. When it appeared the alleged violations required to complete an independent agency, the Constitutional Court," said Goffar which also described the authority of the Court to examine the laws of the 1945 Constitution.

Finally, Goffar explained the obligation to provide the Constitutional Court ruling on the opinion of the House that the President and / or Vice President of suspected heavy offense like treason against the state, corruption, bribery, other crimes, or committed a disgraceful act.

"In the past, prior to the 1945 changes, President Sukarno was ousted because of the rejection of the MPRS. It is also common in the era of President Suharto, who quit after a massive demonstration demanding to withdraw. President Habibie and Wahid also experienced loss of position that all of it happened because the political process, although not yet proven guilty in court. Then the Court is required to hear the verdict on charges and the House members," said Goffar who often praised the enthusiasm and intelligence of students of SMAN 1 Sorolangun that could catapult intelligent questions. (Yusti Nurul Agustin / mh)