Group of students and professors who call themselves Forum Law and Constitutional Studies (FKHK) filed reviewing Article 79 paragraph (3) of Law Number 8 of 2011 concerning Amendment to Law Number 24 Year 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court (MK). Initial hearing for the case was registered with the number 88/PUU-XI/2013 held on Monday (11/11).

In his petition, the Principal Petitioner times it comes the Faculty of Law, University of EsaUnggulJokoWidarto expressed anxiety about the provision in Article 79 that states a quo Court decision related to the case Electoral Dispute (PHPU) shall be final and binding. Why, is considered contrary to the provisions of Article 1 ( 3 ) , Article 28D paragraph ( 1 ) , Article 28H Paragraph ( 2 ) of the 1945 Constitution. The third article in the 1945 Constitution states that Indonesia is a country of law, every person in it has the right to recognition, security,protection, and legal certainty, and every person has the right to equal treatment before the law to have the ease and special treatment for the opportunity and the same benefits to achieve equality and justice.

Joko said that Article 79 of the Act a quo considered contrary to the 1945 Constitution by providing case examples of Southwest Sumba District Election petitioned - David Cornelius pair at the time. To the petition, the Court rejected the petition stating pair David Cornelius - winning pair and strengthen Markus- Ndara.However, after re-calculation by the two districts of West Sumba Police conducted to discover evidence of bubbling noise reduction it transpired that there was a voice for partnerKornelius - Daud.

 “With this reality, eventually Chairman Southwest Sumba Regency ignores the Constitutional Court. With the legal facts, known to have suffered losses should state the color is guaranteed by the constitution. Accordingly, the Applicant considers Article 79 paragraph (3) of Law No. 8 of 2011 concerning Amendment to Law Number 24 Year 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court decision that declared the case PHPU has violated Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution because of the nature of the decision MK has been detrimental to the rights of citizens so automatically contrary to the rule of law which provides for equality of citizens before the law,"said Joko argues. ( YustiNurul Agustin / mh )