---

Petitioner Forkorus Yaboisembut and attorney Jimmy Monim explaining the petition revision through video conference in the material review of the Criminal Code, Wednesday (8/1) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Petitioner of case No. 76/PUU-XVII/2019 Forkorus Yaboisembut, who challenge the Criminal Code (KUHP), explained the revision to the petition in the second hearing in the Constitutional Court (MK) on Wednesday (8/1/2020).

"Following recommendation of the Constitutional Court panel of justices, we added one law to the petition: Law Number 24 of 2000 on Treaties," Forkorus said before the Court led by Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul. 

He Petitioner also removed a statement in the petition that the justices considered as a potential threat or pressure from the Petitioner, in which the Petitioner intended to report to the International Court. "We have removed that part," Forkorus said. 

The third point of revision, the Petitioner said, was regarding a maklumat (announcement) by the Chief of the Indonesian Republic of Papua Regional Police, which was used only as one piece of evidence. "That we add as evidence. Then, we added a conclusion. There are several points. Then, the last is the petitum [where] we omitted the word \'federal state\'," Forkorus explained. 

In the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner expressed his objection to Articles 87 and 88 of the Criminal Code, which read, "’Attempt to commit an act’ exists as soon as the intent of the perpetrator has revealed itself by a commencement of the performance in the sense of Article 53" and "’Conspiracy’ exists as soon as two or more persons agree to commit a crime." Meanwhile, Article 104 reads, "The attempt undertaken with intent to deprive President or Vice President of his/her life or his/her liberty or render him/her unfit to govern shall be punished by capital punishment or life imprisonment or a maximum imprisonment of twenty years."

In this petition, the Petitioner also expressed an objection to a maklumat (announcement) of the Chief of the Indonesian Republic of Papua Regional Police on the Security and Public Order, which consists prohibition against activities that can separate part and territory of the Unitary Republic of Indonesia conspiracy as regulated in Article 104, Article 106, Article 107, Article 108 in conjunction with Article 87, Article 88 of the Criminal Code. 

The Petitioner believes that the announcement to the entire Indigenous Peoples of Papua (MAP) within the Federal Republic of West Papua (NFRPB) has aggravated him, according to Article 28G paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

Based on the Declaration of the Restoration of Unilateral Independence of Papua in the West Papua Nation over the Netherlands’ former colonial territory of the New Guinea (Dutch Papua) in Jayapura City on October 19, 2011, the Papuan peoples have declared their independence. This was in accordance with the principle of uti possidetis juris and legal successor of state, making it legally valid as a treaty subject and has fulfilled the jus cogens norm. 

The Petitioner requested that other laws and regulations that are still relevant to jus cogens continue to be in force and the a quo articles be eliminated so that the Papuan Indigenous Peoples can find solutions to resolve regional legal disputes (annexation) between the NKRI and NFRPB. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti

---