Pros and cons of the existence of Act 12 of 2012 on Higher Education still characterize the trial of Case 33/PUU-XI/2013 on Tuesday (18/6) at the Plenary Court. On the one hand, Law on Higher Education was seen as having given birth commercialization of higher education, and discrimination against the poor, but on the other hand, Act on Higher Education is considered better ensure the implementation of the autonomy of higher education in creating a better quality of higher education in Indonesia.

Bernardus Subroto Mardiatmadja as an expert presented by the applicant revealed that some norms in the Higher Education Act is not right. In fact according to him, is far from the spirit of the Law of Higher education itself. Because the content of the law governing the organization of Higher Education over higher education. "This entire Act is related organizing, not scientific, more to the organizers of the courses. And the other with education," he said.

"One of which is stripped of all this legislation is the human person. Because there is not a human person discussed again, but that is discussed is the organization of the programs. Hence the title Higher education is not appropriate, "he explained. Therefore, according to him, should not be named Higher Education Act Higher Education, but rather about the college organization.

He also concluded, Higher Education Act was not in accordance with Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution that needs to be reviewed thoroughly. "A number of important articles in Act 12 of 2012 are not right when viewed from the perspective of philosophy and humanities education by this law is not precisely defined," he said.

Preventing Exploitative Pattern 

On the other hand, the expert presented by the Government, Ade Armando, argues otherwise. According to Ade Armando, testing the Higher Education Act in this case does not meet the three terms. First, considerations of social justice. The second consideration of the quality of higher education. Third, democratization in Indonesia.

"I believe that this lawsuit is filled, then the right of the people to enjoy higher education and tuition fees will be betrayed justice, the quality of our higher education will fall, and the independence of universities as the nation’s guardian of democracy and progress will be dropped," he said.

Although sympathetic to the spirit promoted by the applicant, but said the allegations saying that the Law on Higher Education has given birth to the commercialization and discrimination against disadvantaged students is unfounded. "Instead of Act 12 of 2012 was born to the charge that will prevent exploitative pattern."

Ade Armando argues, Higher Education Act clearly limit the movement of managers of State Universities Law Board (PTN BH) in implementing the tuition fees. Because the Higher Education Act prohibits PT students set their own tuition. So that those who want to exploit or take advantage of the tuition fees will bite the fingers. "Because of this law states the cost of college students cannot be set arbitrarily by the Rector. Act mandates the government to set the standard unit operating cost of higher education on a periodic basis to be used as a basis by each PTN Legal Entity to establish the cost of each college campus. "

The Act even states the government cannot take off its responsibility to education. Although on the other hand Higher Education Act also limits the authority of the government in order not to intervene in the management autonomy PTN BH. "It’s not an option, but an obligation," said Ade Armando. Therefore, he concluded, the Higher Education Act is much more progressive than the one before. (Dodi / mh)