The use of radio frequency spectrum is part of the telecommunications network operators , the general public has never imposed the obligation to pay the cost of the rights of use of radio frequency spectrum as stated in Law No. 36 of 1999 on Telecommunications ( Telecommunications Act ) and its implementing regulations . This is confirmed by the Director General of Resources and Post and Information and Tools Ministry of Communications and Informations Muhammad Budi Setiawan in a trial that was held Constitutional Court ( MK ) on Thursday ( 10/4 ) at the Plenary Court .

" Because ( the cost of providing telecommunications ) never charged to the Applicant , it becomes very apparent lack of rights and / or their constitutional authority aggrieved by the enactment of the law being applied is tested , thus quo provision is not contrary to Article 28D paragraph ( 1 ) of the Constitution of 1945 , " said Budi hearing before a panel of judges headed by Chief Justice Hamdan Zoelva.

In addition , he explains the concession fee is an obligation imposed on network operators and telecommunications services as compensation for licensing gained in the operation of the network and / or telecommunications services as determined by the percentage of revenue the organization of tissue and / or services , as well as a non-tax revenues are deposited into the state treasury .

While related to the argument of the Petitioners that the government considers arbitrary and without limits by adding new types PNBP with government regulations , Budi outlines that proved untrue and unfounded . " For it is precisely by providing further provisions into the regulations provide legal certainty in the administration and management of non-tax revenue , " he explained .

In the main petition , Petitioner , represented by legal counsel Pradnanda Berbudy , argued that their constitutional rights violated as a result of the application of Article 2 and Article 3 of Law PNPB and Article 16 , Article 26 and Article 34 of the Telecommunications Act . According to the Applicant , the second law is the legal basis for the government do not levy taxes . There are three reception Pradnanda explained that the Universal Service Obligation , the delivery costs of telecommunications and frequency. The law mandates that the Government assessed further regulated by PP. 7/2009 that apply to the Ministry of Communications and Telecommunications . All three charges are non-tax revenues , but do not explicitly set a nominal figure . It turns out that the nominal rate is set in the appendix . This does not indicate the legal uncertainty because the law is not regulated , but in PP , and even then only through the attachment . ( Lulu Anjarsari / mh )