Judicial review of Law 18/2003 on Advocates - Case No. 103/PUU-XI/2013 - held by the Constitutional Court on Thursday (12/12) afternoon. Petitioners are advocates and legal consultants of the Law Firm "OC Kaligis & Associates". Applicant reviewed of Article 2 paragraph (1) of Law no. 18 Year 2003 on Advocates. They considered these provisions have limited rights advocates to education as an advocate.

Article 2 paragraph (1) of the Law Advocates said, "That may be appointed as an advocate is an undergraduate background in higher education and the legal profession after attending a special education advocate who advocate the organization’s performance. "Petitioner is an advocate organization, in this case the Union Indonesian Advocate or Peradi.

However, in practice, said Slamet Yuono one of the Petitioner’s attorney, Peradito be to the detriment of the Petitioners to stop the implementation of the Special Education Profession Advocate ( PKPA ) for no apparent reason and arbitrary, although the Applicant held PKPA in partnership with Peradi.

"Although Peradi has signed a cooperation agreement with PKPA implementation of OC Kaligis & Associates who gave permission to the applicant to conduct PKPA as much as three times a year. But it is complicated to organize PKPA Applicant for a third time in 2013," explained Slamet Yuono.

It is said by Slamet, the article gives absolute authority to Peradi as competent institutions provide education advocate. This also causes the Applicant cannot be held without the permission Peradi education advocates.

Advocates of restrictions on the right of the Constitutional Assembly led by Mohammad Alim , among others, advised the Applicant to be able to elaborate sharper and more detail about what might be the loss of the Petitioners constitutional. ( NanoTresnaArfana / mh )