---

Expert Suteki presented by Petitioners of case 41/PUU-XV/2017 delivering his expertise in the hearing on judicial review of Ormas Law on Monday (2/10) in the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court Building. Photo by PR/Ifa.

The Constitutional Court (MK) once again held a judicial review hearing of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 2/2017 on the Amendment of Law Number 17 Year 2013 on Mass Organizations (Ormas Perppu) on Monday (2/10) in the Plenary Hall of the Constitutional Court. The sixth session was held for seven applications, namely namely cases Number 38, 39, 41, 48, 49, 50, and 52/PUU-XV/2017 to listen to Expert and Related Parties’ testimonies.

Suteki as Expert of Petitioner of Case 41/PUU-XV/2017 delivered an oral statement entitled \'Perppu Ormas Makes Government an Extractive Institution and Distorts the Principles of State of Law\'. According to him, the Ormas Perppu adapted the principle of contrarian actus without considering due process of law. This resulted in the Government as sole interpreter of the rules, which would result in repressive action.

"By adopting the doctrine exemplified by these two authors (Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinsonini), Ormas Perppu that carries the principle of contrarius actus without due process of law have negated the Government as the sole interpreter. This character will potentially lead to repressive acts by the Government. As in the a quo article, it is necessary to see the position of Pancasila which should be placed as an imperative moral teaching. However, if Pancasila is deified and it is venerated blindly, it will be a tool of violence by the rulers," Suteki said before the Panel of Justices led by the Chairman of the Constitutional Court Arief Hidayat.

In his statement, Suteki stated that his critical study on extractive institutions referred to a book titled "Why Nations Fail?" By Daron Acemoglu and James A. Robinson. The book exemplifies Robert Mugabe\'s Government in Zimbabwe in 1980. He says Mugabe\'s \'iron fist’ easily regulated the winner of a lottery held by State Bank. In essence, what Mugabe did was indication of extractive institutions and repressive regimes that occured in Zimbabwe, which led to the country’s collapse in 2008–2009.

Suteki added that Ormas Perppu gave the Government the opportunity to give a verdict to organizations that were against Pancasila and to immediately revoke their legal entity and dissolve them. He considered this dangerous for the nation and the country.

"Obviously, what the Government is doing leads the country to a crossroads and this Perppu also contains a cruel and potentially vandalistic criminal threats," explained Suteki, who is a lecturer at the Faculty of Law of Diponegoro University.

Regarding the Ormas Perppu being considered distorting state of law into state of power, Suteki also confirmed it as a form of crime on the security of the nation. For him, through Ormas Perppu, the Government had created terror for the people because it easily dissolved an organization without due process of law. "Therefore, for this legal terror, there should be a responsibility from the President in a House of Representatives (DPR) session involving the Constitutional Court to decide on the president\'s actions," explained Suteki.

Relevant Parties

At the hearing, a number of organizations were present as Relevant Parties for Case Number 38/PUU-XV/2017 and 39/PUU-XV/2017, namely \'Sabang Merauke Advocates Community\', \'Doctors Community for Pancasila\' and \'8 for NKRI\' to provide information. Doctors Community for Pancasila stated that the constitutional damage argument of Petitioners 38/PUU-XV/2017 was based on mere assumptions. He considered that the commencement of Ormas Perppu in accordance with the urgency and fulfill the parameters that have also been affirmed in the Constitutional Court’s decision. The a quo article challenged was considered by the Relevant Party not threatening the Petitioner’s constitutional rights.

Meanwhile, in relation to Case Number 58/PUU-XV/2017 petitioned by Eggy Sudjana, et al., the Government did not provide any additional information for the new case. At the end of the hearing, Justice Arief also announced that the next hearing would be held on Thursday, October 12, 2017 at 11:00 a.m. to hear experts and witnesses of Petitioners Case 48/PUU-XV/2017.

In their petition, the Petitioners felt that the enactment of Ormas Perppu violated their constitutional rights to associate and assemble as guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution. According to the Petitioners, this perppu allowed the Government to take unilateral action without considering mass organizations’ right to reply. Consequently, this provision may be arbitrarily exploited and this article has taken over the duties of judges in the judgment of cases. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)

---