Agus Supriyanto as legal counsel of the Petitioner explaining the principal points of the petition in the preliminary hearing of the judicial review of Article 23 paragraphs (1) and (2) of Law Number 5 of 1960 on Agrarian Principles, Thursday (4/10) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
Abdullah Bamatraf, a private employee, filed for the material judicial review of Article 23 paragraphs (1) and 2 of Law No. 5/1960 on Agrarian Principles on Thursday (4/10). The Petitioner claimed constitutional damage due to the enactment of the article.
Article 23 of the Agrarian Law reads:
- The right of ownership and likewise each transfer, annulment and encumbrance with other right shall be registered in accordance with the stipulations as mentioned in Article 19.
- The registration meant in paragraph (1) constitutes as strong evidence with regard to the annulment of the right of ownership and the legal validity of transfer and the encumbrance of the said right.
Legal counsel of the Petitioner, Agus Supriyanto, claimed that due to the enactment of the a quo article, the Petitioner’s private ownership in the form of Freehold Title had been annulled by the Decision of the Ministry of Home Affairs SK. 17/DJA/1986.
"The Petitioner objectively suffered material and financial losses where he could not enjoy and occupy the property," he said.
Agus asserted that the a quo article is contradictory to Article 28 H paragraph (4) of the Constitution, which regulates private property rights that cannot be taken arbitrarily by anyone.
Justices’ Advice
Responding to the petition, Constitutional Justice Manahan M.P. Sitompul said that the petition was too simple so that it did not show the Petitioner\\'s intention as well as the constitutional impairment he experienced.
"Next, [the address is incomplete]. In addition, in describing the legal standing, the norm being reviewed needs to be included," he said on Case No. 78/PUU-XVI/2018.
Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo stated that a petition might not request one or two articles to be revoked. He noted that the Petitioner questioned the revocation of the certificate by the Ministry of Home Affairs. "Material review of just one word could be requested. The revocation of certificates by the Ministry of Home Affairs can be done for the public interest," he explained. (Arif/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)
Friday, October 05, 2018 | 16:34 WIB 104