Constitutional Court decided capital of Maybrat district located in Kumurkek District Aifat according to Article 7 of the Law on the Establishment of District Maybrat West Papua unconstitutional insofar as not interpreted ‘Capital District Maybrat domiciled in Ayamaru’.

The Court also declared that Article 7 of the Act does not have binding legal force throughout not be interpreted "Capital District domiciled in Maybrat Ayamaru". The plenary session led by Chief Justice M. Akil M. Mochtar in Review of Act 13/2009 on the establishment of Maybrat Regency, West Papua’s case number 66/PUU-XI/2013 granted that took place on Thursday (19/9). Applicant is Bernard Sagrim as Regent Maybrat and Moses Murafer as Chief Legislative District Maybrat, with attorney Andi M. Asrun.

In legal considerations, the Court considers, determining the capital district, located in Kumurkek Maybrat Aifat District, has ruled factually principles in determining the location of the capital of a region. Aspirations of the people are not being fully utilized as the determination of Maybrat district capital in formation of Act 13/2009, when aspiration is a manifestation of democratic principles.

According to the Court, District Maybrat formation that was originally intended to improve services in the areas of governance, development and social, as well as providing the ability to use the potential of the region cannot be implemented with the enactment of the capital of Maybrat in Kumurkek.

Court argued, the determination should be determined by the district capital Maybrat aspirations of the majority of the community and, most importantly considering that most areas provide ease of provision of services to communities throughout district Maybrat. In addition, the de facto administration of the Maybrat District is in Ayamaru.

Thus, the Court in deciding this petition under Article 1 UUD 1945 which determines, in principle, the country of Indonesia is a democratic constitutional state. Therefore for the sake of expediency and legal certainty in the establishment and implementation of legislation, Article 7 of Act 13/2009 declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution was not interpreted along, "Capital District resident Maybrat Ayamaru". Based on all the foregoing considerations, the Court, Petitioner’s arguments proved according to law.

The next constitutional rights of the applicant, with the enactment of Article 7 of Law no. 13 of 2009 that has resulted in disruption of governmental administration by local government Maybrat that have taken place since the enactment of Act 13 of 2009 due to differences in the factual conditions juridical conditions, ie the de facto seat of government two years since Maybrat district was in Ayamaru on the one hand, remains the de jure Maybrat capital in Kumurkek as stipulated in Article 7 of Law no. 13/2009. ( Nano Tresna Arfana / mh )