Being Differed, Nigerian Drug Suspect Objected MK Law
Image


Constitutional Court (MK) held preliminary trial of Act 24/2003 about Constitutional Court as determined in Act 8/2011 replacement Act 24/2003 on Monday (12/22). The probe was filed by Agbasi Chika, a Nigerian assisted by Didit Wijayanto, Antonius Sujata, Ahmad Murad, Erdiana, Ristan Simbolon, Hanung Hudiono, and Iqbal Alief Maulana as attorneys. Chika is a drugs suspect who asked for justice but feels hindered about the seeking effort by the ruling of Article 51 paragraph (1) UU MK.

“Actually, the Applicant was treated fairly, however his strife was crippled as a quo Article considered hindering the legal process,” said Iqbal Alif.

In the preliminary trial, the Applicant in his provision objecting Article 28D verse (1) 1945 Constitution in which human rights is glorified, meanwhile Article 51 paragraph (1) UU MK addresses Indonesia Citizens only. Albeit, according to the Plaintiff, as long as it corresponding equality and justice, state as human rights protector must handle the responsibility regardless of nation or race. A quo Article is condemned in contrast to 1945 Constitution.

Based on these reasons, the applicant requested the Court to state Article 51 paragraph (1) of the Act the Court contrary to Article 28D (1), Article 28H paragraph (2), Article 28 paragraph (1), paragraph (2), and (5) of the Constitution 1945 and does not have binding legal force

Responding to the request, Constitutional Court Panel Justice Aswanto suggested that the applicant must study and determines whether the proposed law been in accountability to the Court or not, and how the decision take place. "It seems like there are two related decisions of the Constitutional Court Act, among other matters No. 23 / PUU-V / 2007 and case No. 73 / PUU-VIII / 2010. Understood the contents of the decision, because it is useful to draw up petitum as related later with posita. And also the applicant must submit specific disadvantages, and parsed clearly. "Said Aswanto.

In addition, the applicant also asked to clarify who is the petitioner. Whether the applicant who is an advocate acting as a group or as an individual Indonesian citizen who suffered a constitutional loss. (Panji/kun)


Monday, December 22, 2014 | 17:36 WIB 117