Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna welcomed law experts from Australia, South Africa, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, and the Philippines, Wednesday (21/3) at the 11^th Floor Meeting Room. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

Eleven law experts from Australia, South Africa, Germany, Switzerland, Italy, and the Philippines visited the Constitutional Court on Wednesday (21/3/2018). Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna welcomed the guests, who intended to find information on the Constitutional Court (MKRI).

“Our visit is intended to find out more about the constitutional duties and authorities of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia,” said Bertus de Velliers, law expert of Curtin University, Perth, Australia.

The delegations also came to prepare for an international seminar at the Andalas University’s Law Faculty Center for Constitutional Studies, West Sumatera and at Gadjah Mada University’s Center for Anti-corruption Studies, in collaboration with Yogyakarta Palace and the Hanns Seidel Foundation. 

During the visit, the law experts, who are judges, attorneys, and researchers posed questions on matters such as the number of all cases lodged at the Constitutional Court since its establishment. “The number of cases that the Court has reviewed is 2,481 cases, which consist of 1,100 judicial review cases, 25 institutional dispute cases, and the rest is election cases,” Justice Palguna revealed.

The small number of institutional dispute case (SKLN) was questioned. Justice Palguna then explained that it was because not all state institutions can file a dispute petition; only those whose authorities are granted by the 1945 Constitution can.

Another guest asked about the difference between the authorities of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. The Constitutional Court is authorized to review laws against the Constitution, decide on authority dispute among state institutions, decide on disputes over election results, and decide on the dissolution of political parties, and is obligated to decide on the House’s opinion of alleged violation committed by the president and/or vice president.

Meanwhile, the Supreme Court is authorized to address cassation, review regulations under laws, and other authorities granted by the law. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)