Measures and policies of National Law Development Board (BPHN) Ministry of Law and Human Rights (Kemenkumham) with open enrollment and verification of candidate legal aid advocates questioned by six people to the Constitutional Court (MK) cases through the State Authority Dispute (SKLN).

In case number 1/SKLN-XI/2012 session on Wednesday (17/04), Dominggus Maurits Luitnan and LA Lada representing his colleagues, namely Suhardi Somomoelyono, Abdurrahman Tardjo, Mansjur Abu Bakar, and Metiawati, revealed to the judges constitution led by Judge Maria Farida Indrati, that BPHN steps by doing verification for candidate registration and legal aid judged to have exceeded its authority.

According to Dominggus, the authority should be implemented by the applicant as an advocate. "We The Advocate as the applicant feels aggrieved with the authority to take over the recruitment of candidates or prospective legal aid lawyers," he said. According to him, the authority of the candidate selection and verification of legal aid lawyers was carried out by the organization and not by BPHN.

The legal status of applicant

Maria Farida Indrati reminds the applicant regarding the legal status or the legal standing of the applicant. According to Maria, SKLN petition can only be filed by a state agency and the authority granted by the constitution mentioned. "If we see here you are on behalf of the advocates here, whether it is a state agency advocates mentioned by the constitution and also whether there is constitutional authority given to the agency’s Father?" said Maria.

The same thing also expressed by Hamdan Zoelva, even raised the question of the constitutional judges who also questioned the legal aid applicant in the case of testing a number 88/PUU-X/2012 concerning with judicial review of Act 16 of 2001 on Legal Aid. Besides reminding about the applicant’s legal position, Hamdan also questioned the Respondent made by the Petitioners. "The problem is that the National Law Development Board is a state agency whose authority granted by the Constitution of 1945?" said Hamdan.

While Muhammad Alim gives advice to the applicant’s request to reconsider, because if it is the applicant in question BPHN actions that violate the provisions of the Act, Alim states, "The applicant may sue in court if the authorities deemed it taken by someone else but does not include SKLN, sued only as an act of breaking law. Article 3, Article 65 of the Civil Code."

On the advice of counsel Constitutional Assembly, Dominggus said it would formulate a petition back, especially about the applicant’s legal position in the case filed SKLN. (Ilham / mh)