---

Muhammad Sholeh as Principal Petitioner delivering petition points for material judicial review of the Law on Hajj Funds Management on Wednesday (23/8) in the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court Building. Photo by PR/Ganie.

The Government plans to invest Hajj funds to build infrastructure has caused concerns in the community. These concerns are mainly felt by hajj pilgrim candidates who have deposited funds to the Hajj Management Body (BPIH). One of them is Muhammad Sholeh. He took a legal action by petitioning for a judicial review of Law Number 34 of 2014 on Hajj Funds Management to the Constitutional Court. The first hearing of case number 51/PUU-XV/2017 was held on Wednesday (23/8) in the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court.

In the principal issue of his petition, Sholeh argues that his constitutional rights are violated by the enactment of three articles, namely Article 24 letter a, Article 46 paragraph (2), and Article 48 paragraph (2) of the Law on Hajj Funds Management.

Article 24 letter a

"In performing its duties as referred to in Article 22, the Hajj Fund Management Agency (BPKH) is authorized to: a. collect and invest Hajj Funds in accordance with sharia principles, prudence, security, and value of benefits."

Article 46 paragraph (2)

"(2) Hajj Funds as referred to in paragraph (1) may be collected and/or invested."

Article 48 paragraph (2)

(2) The collection and/or investment of Hajj Funds as referred to in paragraph (1) shall be conducted in accordance with sharia principles by considering the aspects of security, prudence, value of benefits, and liquidity."

The Petitioner registered as a hajj pilgrim candidate at the office of Ministry of Religious Affairs in Sidoarjo, East Java by depositing Rp20 million fund on February 13, 2008. However, the Petitioner never received explanation whether the deposited fund will be invested. According to the Petitioner, it would violate his constitutional rights if his hajj fund was used for investment without approval. "The Petitioner paid the BPIH initial deposit as a down payment for hajj pilgrimage costs, not for investment," said Soleh before the Panel of Justices led by Deputy Chief of Justice Anwar Usman.

Therefore, the Petitioner requested that the Panel of Judges cancel the enactment of the three articles.

Judges’ Advice

In response to the petition, Justices Wahiduddin Adams and Aswanto provided suggestions for revision. Anwar suggested that the Petitioner revise his legal standing. Then, he asked the Petitioner to organize the argument originating from what he experienced into constitutional right damages. "This petition seems more like a constitutional complaint rather than a law review. Please change the argument, "Anwar said.

The Petitioner was given 14 workdays to correct his petition. The next hearing was scheduled for the revision of the petition.

(Lulu Anjarsari/lul/Yuniar Widiastuti)

---