The Constitutional Court (MK) held judicial review hearing of Act on Hospital filed by Central Board of Muhammadiyah, Tuesday (7/5). The session was scheduled to revise petition.

Petitioner’s Attorney, Syaiful Bahri presented and delivered the revised petition that has been done. Syaiful said he has added to the reasons for and add other Muhammadiyah Hospital in the various regions in Indonesia was also harmed by the Hospital Act.

"Concerning Article 7 paragraph (4) of Law Hospital, we gave the reason that the provisions of Article 7 (4) Hospitals Act is contrary to the provisions of Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution because it reduces constitutional rights as those who have had weight status laws that do not conflict with the statutory provisions applicable because Applicant requires specialized legal form of the hospital. It does not recognize same rights and gather Petitioner in the form of Muhammadiyah which has been recognized by the state since before independence up to independence," said Syaiful.

Then, Syaiful back explaining arguments related application of Article 17 of Law Hospital harm Petitioner stated. Syaiful said Article 17 of Law Hospital led all Muhammadiyah Hospital owned applicant be not only because of legal certainty established by Muhammadiyah who are not established in the legal form of the particular hospital.

"The provisions of Article 62 and 63 of Law Hospital, is clearly contrary to the right of an applicant who has a business charity hospital founded by Muhammadiyah for the constitutionally guaranteed right to the protection of self, family, honor, dignity, and property, charitable efforts of hospitals under his control, and the right to security and protection from threats to do or not do something that is a human right," explained Syaiful. He said his client’s petition has also improved on the advice of a panel of judges who delivered the preliminary hearing.

Achmad Sodiki who acted as Chairman of the Panel before closing the hearing said petition is to report on the Consultative Meeting to determine the continuation of the trial of this case. "So you are waiting for the first of what will be decided by the Consultative Meeting," said Sodiki while closing the session. (Yusti Nurul Agustin / mh)