Petitioner Amustofa Besan and legal counsels during the judicial review hearing of Law No. 32 of 2008 on the Establishment of South Buru District in Maluku Province, Thursday (7/2) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

The preliminary judicial review hearing of Law No. 32 of 2008 on the Establishment of South Buru District, Maluku Province and the Appendix on Regional Map of South Buru District, Maluku Province was held by the Constitutional Court on Thursday (7/2/2019).

The petition No. 11/PUU-XVII/2019 was filed by Ramly Umasugi dan Amustofa Besan as Regent and Vice Regent of Buru District (Petitioners I); Iksan Tinggapy, A. Azis Hentihu, and Djalil Mukadar as Chairman and Vice Chairman of Buru District Legislative Council (Petitioners II); and residents of Waihotong Village and Batu Karang Village Mahmud Nustelu and Elias Behuku (Petitioners III).

The Petitioners argued that their constitutional rights were violated by the enactment of the a quo law articularly Article 3 paragraph (2) and the Appendix of the Regional Map of the South Buru District, Maluku Province. The article was considered not providing legal certainty and leading to multiple interpretations. Attorney Fahri Bachmid, who accompanied by Buru Vice Regent Amustofa Besan, explained that the vague definition of the norm and the multiple interpretations of Article 3 paragraph (2) adng the Appendix on the Regional Map of Law 32/2008 on administrative area have certainly caused losses to citizens residing in Waehotong Village and Batu Karang Village, as factually experienced by the Petitioner. Fahri explained that the constitutional impairment of the Petitioners was related to the uncertainty over the status of the borders of the region they reside in. "Do they belong in Buru District or South Buru District?,” Fahri asked.

Fahri said clarity of regional boundaries was of importance for administration needs such as ID extension or certainty of Permanent Voters List (DPT) in the elections or the local election as a form of public service that must be carried out by the regional government. According to the Petitioners, the obscurity of the norm of Article 3 paragraph (2) and the Appendix of the Regional Map in Law No. 32/2008 on territorial boundaries has an impact on the efforts to obtain rights to obligations that citizens must be fulfill.

“The community will be disadvantaged if they have fulfilled their obligations to an institution in particular district, but it should have been done in an institution in another district, that it creates confusion for the citizens in fighting for their rights. The local government of Maluku has worked optimally to resolve the issue through mediation, coordination, and intense meetings,” Fahri affirmed.

Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Constitutional Justices declare Article 3 paragraph (2) and the Appendix of the Regional Map in Law No. 32 of 2008 on the Establishment of South Buru District, Maluku Province conditionally unconstitutional insofar as not be interpreted, “except Waehotong Village that belongs in Kepala Madan Sub-district and Batu Karang Village in Leksula Sub-district belong in the administrative region of Buru District.”

Revise Articles in Petition

Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams observed the petition that did not mention the articles impugned in the opening of the petition. Only in the Appendix of Regional Map were the articles mentioned. “As if all the content of Law No. 32 of 2008 [was problematic]. The Petitioners only mention the reference is the 1945 Constitution,” he said.

Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo advised that the Petitioners strengthen their legal standing. “After the preliminary hearing there will be the petition revision hearing, and the three of us will report the substance of the petition to the other constitutional justices. In the Justices Deliberation Meeting, it will be decided whether your petition will be forwarded to the plenary hearing for verification. The Principal Petitioners would be judged by the Court, whether you have legal standing or not,” he affirmed. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)