Chief Justice Arief Hidayat beats a gong to officially open 2015 Chief Justice’s National Moot Court Competition on Friday (13/11) at Universitas Tarumanegara’s Auditorium. Photo PR/Dedy

In collaboration with Universitas Tarumanegara, the Constitutional Court holds 2015 Chief Justice’s National Moot Court Competition (Kompetisi Peradilan Semu Tingkat Nasional Piala Bergilir Ketua Mahkamah Konstitusi 2015). Chief Justice Arief Hidayat officially opens the competition on Friday (13/11) at Universitas Tarumanegara’s Auditorium.

Hidayat delivers that moot court competition is a way of improving law students’ quality. He says that quality disparity of law bachelors causes chaotic law enforcement. It is because law students tend to learn law in technocratic way. “Law enforcement is not just in technocratic way. Sympathy, emphaty, and God’s values are also needed because law enforcement closely relates with justice,” said him in front of 12 student delegations who qualify in the competition.

In a seminar entitled “Natural Resources Liberalization in Indonesia” which following the opening ceremony, Hidayat delivers lecture entitled “Natural Resources Management Conception from Constitution Perspective”. He delivers that Article 33 (2) and (3) the 1945 Constitution regulates natural resources management. The Constitutional Court, Hidayat further says, has adjudicated several judicial reviews concerning natural resources, such as water resources. He asserts that the Court is not anti-privatization.   

Constitutional Justice Patrialis Akbar delivers similar statements in his lecture entitled “Citizen’s Constitutional Rights Protection in Natural Resources Utilization in Indonesia”. Akbar explains that privatization doesn’t contrary to the Constitution as long as it doesn’t harm the communities. The annulations of Act of Water Resources doesn’t mean that the Court anti-privatization. Government Regulation as the implementation of Act of Water Resources didn’t fulfill restriction principle of water resources management. For example, Article 1 number 9 Government Regulation Number 16 Year 2005 of Water Supply Development which stated water supply development is organized by state-owned/regional-owned enterprises, cooperatives, private companies, or communities. Whereas Article 40 (2) Act of Water Resources had been declared that central/regional governments are responsible in water supply development. Akbar assesses that Government Regulation Number 16 Year 2005 is privatization in disguise and constitutional interpretation violation, because it creates profit-oriented mindset. “It is clear that privatization Articles are contrary to Article 33 the 1945 Constitution, thus it should be annulled,” said Akbar. (Lulu Anjarsari/IR/Prasetyo Adi N)