As in previous days, this time coming from the group of students and lecturers of the Faculty of Law, University of Bengkulu make a visit to the Constitutional Court (MK), Monday (17/6). Students who attended visits alma mater blue jacket was welcomed by Arief Hidayat. Not only that, Arief in the midst of busy life also took time to submit material about Constitutional Court.

Arief opened the visit expressed his happiness due to meet with the students who attended. After delivering a warm opening, Arief also conveyed the points that he wanted to expose in front of the students and the lecturers. The points are, among others, the existence of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia, the history of the formation of MK in Indonesia, an important role in the Indonesian Constitutional Court, as well as the role and functions of the Constitutional Court in the state of life in Indonesia.

Arief said that before the 1945 Constitution is too simple, too few norms being regulated, overly broad in scope, and the mechanism is left to state officials. In fact, continued Arief, organizers state that in fact humans have a gap to do corrupt. The gap will get bigger when the power or authority granted to the organizers so much. "So the therapy, it’s Constitution, which also must be changed. 1945 there was a change the first time in 1999 to the fourth stage of change," said Arief.

Next, Arief explained the significance of the presence of the Court after the change. Because the constitution is the supreme law, then there must be institutions that uphold the constitution. Unlike before the 1945 changes to the constitution the supreme law, but there is no attempt to enforce it, to uphold the constitution of the state of life that later formed the Constitutional Court. "In the past, the constitution was always enforced politically, it has never been legal. So when there is a problem between the institution and the other institutions, the decision depends on the president at that time as the supreme political power," said Arief again.

In addition, Arief also said that the Court should issue 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 Arief. 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.

Arief also had a chance to interact with some of the students were asking him questions. With a straightforward, Arief was answering the questions of the students who considered it a very weighty. (Utami Argawati / mh)