---

As-Syafiiyah Abdul Chair Ramadhan, a lecturer of the Faculty of Law of the Islamic University, and Zen Zanibar M.Z., a lecturer of the Faculty of Law of Sriwijaya University, as experts presented by the Petitioners to lend expertise in the judicial review hearing of the Ormas Law on Thursday (22/2) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The ban contained in Law Number 16 Year 2017 on Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 2 Year 2017 concerning Amendment of Law No. 16/2017 on the Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 2/2017 on the Amendment of Law No. 17/2013 on Mass Organizations into a Law (Ormas Law) is against the criminal law system. This was conveyed by a lecturer of the Faculty of Law of the Islamic University, As-Syafiiyah Abdul Chair Ramadhan, presented by the Petitioner as an Expert in the follow-up judicial review session on Thursday (22/2) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court.

In his statement, Chair assessed that in the phrase “menganut” ("embrace") in Article 59 paragraph (4) letter c of the Ormas Law harms the community for judging a person not based on criminal act only, but also ideas. As for the multi-interpretation of the norm of ban in Article 59 paragraph (4) letter c of the Ormas Law, Chair believes that the government has not taken legal action to prove an established mass organization is aimed at replacing or even changing Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. "It became very clear that the Perppu that has become the Ormas Law has eliminated the role of the court and tends to put the government beyond its authority," he said.

Chair also concluded that according to the principle, law should protect the people against the arbitrary power of the state. The guarantee of compliance with the principle of legality must be met in every formulation of the law. "If this norm remains and has binding legal force, it will provide a justification for the government to take actions beyond its authority and against the law itself," he said.

No Criteria Yet

Meanwhile, a lecturer of the Faculty of Law of Sriwijaya University, Zen Zanibar M.Z., who was also the Petitioners’ Expert mentioned the absence of criteria of mass organizations that contradict Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. In fact, he continued, as the basis for punishing mass organizations and their members, there should be a law detailing it, although making legal norms contrary to that principle is unusual in jurisprudence.

Zen also explained that the Ormas Law has not yet adhered to the contrarius actus  principle so it is not effectively used to impose sanctions on mass organizations that embrace, develop, and disseminate teachings or doctrines contrary to Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. The administrative law actions that have been imposed on a mass organization should not be used on the basic rights and obligations of individual citizens, because the rights based on public law cannot be eliminated with administrative law actions. However, it can only be reduced or revoked under a public legal process, namely a court decision, through a valid judicial process. 

In Zen\\'s view, what needs to be observed on the legalization of the Ormas Perppu as Ormas Law is a mistake. He saw that the Ormas Law threaten and oppress all mass organizations without exception. "Whereas, in modern countries, mass organizations are given rich living space in order to contribute to state affairs. Even in many developed countries, thousands of mass organizations have a public role in order to strengthen the state," said Zen before the hearing led by Deputy Chief of Constitutional Court, Anwar Usman, in the presence of the other Constitutional Justices. 

Adverse Persecution

Meanwhile, Hizbut Tahrir Indonesia (HTI) member Farid Wadjdi in his statement as the Witness of the Petitioners, conveyed the purpose of the organization that has been developing since 1990 in Indonesia. Farid explained that HTI is a da\\'wah [(religious proselytizing)] organization based on the intention to encourage Muslims along the path of good. However, the events experienced by the organization have made he and many of the members or activists of the organization to no longer be able to perform da\\'wah activities as they used to.

"Since the HTI license was revoked, we have not fully engaged in da\\'wah activities due to persecution of activists due to the negative opinions that the media built. In the end, many sessions by HTI activists were cancelled citing permit revocation," he explained.

The case No. 2/PUU-XVI/2018 was filed by Dewan Dakwah Islamiyah Indonesia, Yayasan Forum Silaturahmi Antar-Pengajian Indonesia, Perkumpulan Hidayatullah, and Munarman. The Petitioners argue that the Ormas Law is threatening the independence in assembling, associating, expressing thoughts and attitudes, according to the conscience because it eliminates the role of the court in imposing sanctions on the mass organizations. Consequently, the Petitioners request the revocation of Article 59 paragraph (4) letter c, Pasal 62 ayat (3), and Article 80A of the Ormas Law that was passed into law last October.

Before closing the hearing, Deputy Chief Justice Anwar Usman said that the hearing will resume on Tuesday, March 6 at 11:00 a.m. with the agenda to hear testimony from witnesses and experts for the Petitioners. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)

---