Act 24/2009 about Flag, Language, State Symbol, and National Anthem (Act of State Symbols) is being reviewed by Constitutional Court (MK) on Monday (9/3) at MK Plenary Room. The Act was pleaded by Law and Constitutional Study Forum, represented by Victor Santoso Tandiasa.   

Victor who stood without his Attorney, once also pleaded for judicial review over same Articles in 2012. Nonetheless, he explained that this time he objects for different matter. This time, Victor explained that he is arguing phrase “Similar to State Symbol” in Article 57 letter c Act of State Symbol. Article 57 letter c says “C. Produce symbol for individual, Political Parties, organization, and/or company that similar to State Symbol”.

“State symbol is unifying medium, identity, and a realization of our existence. But by the ruling of which, conflict may smear due to the criminalized activity of using the symbol in their products,” he explained.

According to the Plaintiff, the usage of State Symbol is not ridiculing, in contrast, it is a form of expressing nationalism. He also cited that the phrase “similar to State Symbol” in Article 57 letter c Act 24/2009 and Article 69 letter b Act 24/2009 are errant because sanction of which failed to fulfill the clear (lex certa), written (lex scripta), and binding (lex stricta) formulation.

Therefore, the Plaintiff asked Article 57 letter c and Article 69 letter b to be declared oppose 1945 Constitution. In response to the Application, Panel of Justices suggested several revisions. Justice Patrialis Akbar, for instance, suggested that the Plaintiff should have explained his legal standing first. “In the meantime, the application form must be adjusted to PMK 6/2005. Should you try to compare what happened now and then,” he added. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh/kun)