MK: DPRD Speakership Determined on Voting, Constitutional
Image


Constitutional Court (MK) turned down DPRD speakership mechanism as petitioned by Purwakarta DPRD members. The regulation is determined in controversial UU MD3. Verdict was recited by Chief Justice Hamdan Zoelva on Wednesday (11/5) at MK Plenary room.

In Court’s opinion, Article 376 verse (2), verse (3), verse (4), verse (5), verse (6), verse (7), verse (8) and verse (9) and phrases “Compliance Requirement” in Article 377 verse (6) UU MD3 is in line to democracy enforcement in the parliament. Representative principle is perpetuated by the ruling Act.

According to the Court, 1945 Constitution does not adjudicate mechanism for parliament speakership, as for it the Constitution bestow the mechanism to be later adjudicated in particular bill and it is House’s rights to regulate.

“Based on those considerations, parliament’s speakership mechanism as adjudicated in a quo bill is not opposing fair and proper legal certainty principle, it is an opened legal policy from the lawmaker. Thus, the petition does not stand on legal reason,” Patrialis said.

According to Patrialis, the petition was too restricted to be applied to Purwakarta DPRD only, while MK’s decision is erga omnes. Restricting the verdict into particular place, time, and cases is not akin to circumstance the Court milling in as a quo bill is generally applied.

In the substantial demand, the Plaintiffs said their constitutional rights were harmed by the ruling of Article 376 verse (2), (3), (4), (5), (6), (7), (8), and verse (9), Article 377 verse (6) UU MD3. According to the Plaintiffs, the ruling neglects DPRD members’ rights to gain same condition as determined in the 1945 Constitution. The petition has been filed by 24 out of 45 Purwakarta DPRD members, comprising 50% plus 1 quorum.

The Plaintiff explained DPRD speaker must be chosen amongst the best DPRD members, not determined by the most votes. The plaintiffs considered the Article harmed equality rights and social justice treat. Plaintiffs see, UU MD3 explained that DPR and DPRD have same task, how come the speakership being regulated differently. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh/kun)


Wednesday, November 05, 2014 | 17:59 WIB 170