Plenary ruling hearing of the judicial review of the Supreme Court Law, Wednesday (30/1) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the judicial review petition of Article 47 of Law No. 14/1985 on the Supreme Court. The decision No. 95/PUU-XVI/2018 was read out on Wednesday (30/1/2019) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court.

Petitioners H. Husin Syahendra and Nurhayati were cassation appellants in Case No. 03/ PDT.G/2014/PN.RHL, which was decided on July 15, 2014 by the Rokan Hilir District Court in conjunction with Case No. 65/PDT/2018/PT.PBR, which was decided on July 11, 2018 by the Pekanbaru High Court. They were litigants in the Rokan Hilir District Court, Riau. They had won the case at the district court. However, the Petitioners had wanted to appeal, they experienced a delay of more than 14 days and so the cassation brief to be submitted exceeded the deadline. This kept them from being able to file a petition for cassation.

In legal considerations read out by Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo, the Court is of the opinion that the norms for the Elucidation to Article 47 paragraph (1) of the Supreme Court Law that reads, "The petition for cassation brief shall be furnished with a cassation memorandum containing the reasons, submitted within 14 (fourteen) days after the request is recorded in the book list" has treated the applicant and defendant of the cassation equally. Therefore, he continued, the argument of the Petitioners that the norm of Article 47 paragraph (1) of the Supreme Court Law discriminate and violate the dignity and recognition of the legal rights of the Petitioner must be ruled out.

"Because, the deadline for filing cassation and counter cassation as stipulated in Article 47 paragraphs (1) and (3) of the Supreme Court Law actually provides legal certainty related to the deadline for cassation and counter cassation delivery that must be obeyed by the parties. As such, settlement of the case is not protracted and this is in line with the principle of simple, fast, and low-cost judicial process," said Justice Suhartoyo

Justice Suhartoyo added that the affirmation of the Court, while at the same time answered the Petitioner\'s arguments on the deadline for notification of cassation request to the defendant and the deadline for filing counter cassation, actually provided guarantee of legal certainty to the parties as stipulated in Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

"Therefore, the argument of the Petitioner must be ruled out as well. Based on the entire legal considerations above, the Court is of the opinion that the petition of the Petitioner concerning the unconstitutionality of Article 47 paragraph (1) along the phrase "within 14 (fourteen) days after the request is recorded in the book list" of the Supreme Court Law has no legal grounds," explained Justice Suhartoyo. (Arif Satriantoro/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)