The establishment of the Financial Services Authority (OJK) is the result of an institutional reform process that has taken place more than one decade since 1998. The formation, originated from the weakness of the national banking supervision resulting in financial crisis in 1997. This was disclosed by Mulya P. Nasution as Government Expert in judicial review on Act 21/2011 (UU OJK) on Wednesday (11/11) at the Plenary Room.

"In 1998 the idea of establishing an independent supervisory agency of financial services was emerged as an effort to improve regulation monitoring of financial services industry," he said in front of panel of Justices led by Deputy Chief Justice Arief Hidayat.

Mulya describes that the implementation of the institutional transformation is necessary to prevent recurrence of crisis, as happened in the past. Not only that, the establishment of OJK is also aiming to increase capability to deal with various problems and boosting challenges as a result of the growth and dynamics of the financial services industry in the future. Regulation and supervision of the financial services sector can only comply professionally if the institution is mandated to be independent, given the task are not under influence of the executive or legislature.

"The banking crisis that hit Indonesia, which later expanded into a political and economic crisis decades ago, shows us how important the existence of an independent agency of financial services supervisory. Therefore, the lawmakers in our country, exactly 10 years ago agreed to pour the establishment of the supervisory agency in an exact Act, "he said.

While Refly Harun other Government expert took a view from historical perspective. OJK formation was a compromise to avoid deadlock discussion of the law on Bank Indonesia by Parliament. At the beginning of President Habibie’s administration, the government proposed a draft bill on Bank Indonesia that provides independence to the central bank.

"At the time the bill was filed, rejections were swarming from BI and the House of Representatives, as a compromise it was agreed that the agency will replace Bank Indonesia in supervising the bank, as well as overseeing other financial institutions. Not to be seen that the separation of supervisory function of the central bank is to be cut, "he said.

In their petition, the Petitioner argues that their constitutional rights have been violated by the enactment of Article 1 paragraph 1, Article 5, Article 6, Article 7, Article 37, Article 55, Article 64, Article 65, and Article 66 of the OJK Act. As a taxpayer, the applicant condemned authority of the OJK has exceeded the authority possessed by Bank Indonesia as the central bank. In short, OJK, according to the Petitioners only have the authority to establish rules related to financial supervision duties which adjudicated under article 34 paragraph 1 of the Law of Bank Indonesia. This led the OJK’s authority in supervising non-bank financial institutions and other financial services is not valid because the articles do not regulate it. (Lulu Anjarsari /mh/kun)