Revision hearing of judicial review of the Advocate Law, Tuesday (22/5) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court held a follow-up hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 18/2003 on Advocates filed by a number of advocates on Tuesday (22/5) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. The case No. 35/PUU-XVI/2018 was filed by Bahrul Ilmi Yakup, Shalil Mangara Sitompul, Gunadi Handoko, Rynaldo P. Batubara, Ismail Nganggon, and Iwan Kurniawan.

In the hearing, Bahrul Ilmi Yakup delivered the points of revision, including the addition of the reference norms, namely Article 28 and Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. The Petitioners also added the word "profession" to the description of the advocate.

"We revised some points based on the advice of the Constitutional Justices, from correcting editorial errors in the document, adding the reference norms Article 28 and 28J paragraph (2), adding description of the advocate organization, adding the word \'profession\' to advocate\'s description, as well as including the opinion of the Constitutional Court on open legal policy of sole professional organization," Bahrul explained before the chairperson of the session, Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo, in the presence of Constitutional Justices Manahan M.P. Sitompul and Saldi Isra.

The Petitioners argued that the 34 articles in the Advocate Law along the phrase \'advocate organizations\' contain more than one meaning of advocate organizations, and so are multi-interpretive. Thus, the a quo norms do not qualify for good constitutionality of the law, that is, clear, solid, and complete. In addition, the Petitioners argue that the legal standing is implied by the Petitioners’ constitutional rights having been impaired by the enactment of the phrase \'advocate organizations\'. Because, in practice, the phrase has been manipulated by various parties to allow the emergence of various advocate organizations such as the Association of Indonesian Advocates (Peradi), the Association of Indonesian Advocates of the Republic of Indonesia (Peradri), the Congress of Indonesian Advocates (KAI), and others, that claim to be legitimate as well as authorized to exercise the authority as regulated in the Advocate Law. These organizations have provided education to prospective advocates, appointed advocates, applied for advocate oath in the high court, recruited members, and supervised and imposed sanctions on advocates. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)