Constitutional Court researcher Mohammad Mahrus Ali welcoming students of the Sharia Faculty of the State Islamic University (UIN) Raden Inten, Lampung on Thursday afternoon (5/3/2020) in the hall of the Constitutional Court.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—Constitutional Court (MK) researcher Mohammad Mahrus Ali talked about the Constitutional Court and the latest landmark decisions, including those on new legal principals such as that related to simultaneous general elections. He welcomed 240 students and 9 lecturers of the Sharia Faculty of the State Islamic University (UIN) Raden Inten, Lampung on Thursday afternoon (5/3/2020) in the hall of the Constitutional Court.

Ali talked about landmark Decision No. 93/PUU-X/2012 on sharia banking. It provides legal certainty in relation to the elucidation to Article 55 of the Sharia Banking Law, whose substance contradicted Article 55 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3).

"Therefore, the Court revoked the elucidation. The elucidation to Article 55 led to legal uncertainty and the loss of customers’ constitutional right to obtain fair legal certainty in the settlement of sharia banking disputes," Ali explained. 

Ali also talked about Decision No. 55/PUU-XVII/2019 regarding simultaneous elections, which provides a recent interpretation of the simultaneous elections. The Court stated that there were six variants in the simultaneous election. "These six variants were interesting. How the KPU and legislators regulate Simultaneous Elections in 2024. With the previous ruling, the Constitutional Court stated five boxes simultaneously. There was no mention of the implementation, in one day, all at once, or gradually," he explained. 

Ali further said the law is a product and may not always be in line with what the will of the people. "There must be [people] disadvantaged, students, lecturers, [or] society in general. The proof is in the Constitutional Court. We accept [judicial review petition of] various laws, not only related to elections, politics, but also to education, lecturers, marriage, Islamic law, and other fields ," Ali explained. He added that anyone who felt that their constitutional rights have been violated may petition a judicial review to the Court.

Ali then explained the difference between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. The Constitutional is known as a court of law, which adjudicates the law itself, while the Supreme Court is a court of justice. The Constitutional Court reviews laws against the Constitution while the Supreme Court tries concrete cases such as marriage, divorce, civil cases, etc. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti

Translation uploaded on 3/9/2020