Law No. 40 Year 2009 on Youth petitioned by several people representing youth organizations on Monday (10/2) at the Plenary Court. Petition number 9/PUU-XIII/2014 filed by Yudha Indrapraja et al.

Indrapraja Yudha stated he felt inhibited regeneration process undertaken by the organization with the enactment of Article 1 paragraph (1) of the Youth Law. The Petitioners as functionaries youth organizations have problems, indecision, doubt and uncertainty in the law of regeneration and recruitment process as a member of the spirit of youth organizations because it involves the circulation of leadership and organizational sustainability.

Article 1 paragraph 1 of Law led mention "Youth is an Indonesian citizen who entered an important period of growth and development over the age of 16 (sixteen ) to 30 (thirty ) years". This provision has caused some confusion and bias in defining youth have been incorporating the definition of children and youth . " In fact, the definition of children and youth is different," said Yudha in front of judge Patrialis Akbar.

According to Petitioner, the provision is a policy that is contrary to Article 1 paragraph ( 1 ) of Law No. 23 of 2002 on Child Protection that shows the child is a person who has not turned 18 years old , including children who are still in the womb . It is also contrary to Section 1 of Article 1 of the Convention on the Rights of the Child was approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations on November 20, 1989 which showed for the purposes of the present Convention, a child means every human being below the age of 18 years unless under the law law applicable to the child, maturity is attained earlier. "This has resulted in obstacles and uncertainty in the process of recruitment of youth organization because of differences in definitions between the children and youth," he explained.

Moreover, contrary to the provisions of Article 28B Paragraph ( 2 ) of the 1945 Constitution which shows every child has the right to live, grow, and develop as well as the right to protection from violence and discrimination that pose a potential claimed the rights of children. "For this reason, the Applicant requested that the judges of the Constitutional Court declared Article 1 paragraph (1) of Law No. 40 Year 2009 on the phrase led mainly Indonesian citizen who entered an important period of growth and development over the age of 16 (sixteen) years of conflict with the provisions Article 28D (1) and Article 28B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution," he said.

Judge advice

At the trial, the Constitutional Assembly to suggest improvements to the Petitioners. Maria Farida Indrati questioned legal standing, because the average of the Petitioners about 30 years old and above. "Should the Petitioners cite petitioned article. Then if the Applicant says the age of 16 years , the applicant should ask the interpretation of the meaning of youth. Because if the phrase ‘16 years’ is omitted, then the article will not be read," he added. ( Lulu Anjarsari / mh )