"The Court should issue a ruling ultra petita, the verdict in excess of what is requested, as long as it aims to explore and find substantive justice, and above all that, it can also be seen as part of efforts to prevent a vacuum in the law," said Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat before 35 Master of Law students of the University of Diponegoro, Semarang. Monday (05/20/2013).

According to him, as the guardian and interpreter of the end of the Constitution, the Court is fully entitled to give the final interpretation of the existence of a law. If the Court perceives a constitutional Law crashing, then the Court may give an interpretation of the new norm. "In this case, the Court also serves as positive legislators and wrote that describes the norms contained and not only declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution or not. If only stating yes or no, then the task of the Court was limited to negative legislator," explained Hidayat.

Associated with the absence of specific regulatory body that oversees the attitudes and behavior of constitutional justice, Hidayat said the oversight of constitutional judges conducted by the Honorary Judges Council, whose members include former constitutional judge who secured independence, national figures spirited statesman and law professor who has a record good track. "The judge’s Honorary Council will undertake the supervision of judges," said Arif. (Juliette / mh)