Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh speaking at an online Special Education of Professional Advocate (PKPA) organized by the Atma Jaya University and the Peradi council on Saturday (19/9) from Jakarta. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) wasn’t granted the authority to review the perppu (government regulations in lieu of laws), but since 2009 a number of perppu have been petitioned at the Court. The Court has dispensed a legal opinion that perppu has provisions that are equally binding as laws, thus the norms in perppu can be reviewed materially, said Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh at an online Special Education of Professional Advocate (PKPA) program on the Constitutional Court’s procedural law on Saturday, September 19, 2020, which was organized by the Law Faculty of the Catholic University of Atma Jaya and the Peradi council.
He said the review can continue if the perppu hasn’t been ratified by the House (DPR) into a law. Once it is ratified by the House, the petition loses its object. “Since 2019 to 2019, there have been 24 judicial review cases of perppu at the Constitutional Court. This is the development of the Court’s authorities. The petitions were mostly dismissed, while some were withdrawn and denied,” he said.
The Court’s authorities have also developed to include deciding on regional head election (pilkada) disputes, which remains under the Court’s purview until a special judicial body is established. He Justice Foekh admitted that pilkada cases are very dynamic, so it needs a special body that focuses on resolving them.
“The resolution of election disputes that the Court does is based on Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution. The elections are those to elect president/vice president, DPR, DPD, and DPRD. That’s the meaning of the article. Meanwhile, pilkada is under the purview of the regional government, which is regulated in another regulation. However, in practice, the Court still has this additional authority,” he explained.
Constitutional Court’s Procedural Law
He then explained the procedural law at the Constitutional Court. Every petition must be written in Indonesian and signed by the petitioners or their attorney, and be made into 12 copies to be distributed to the nine constitutional justices and the litigating parties, such as the House, the Government, and the relevant party.
At the preliminary examination hearing, a panel of justices will offer recommendations to revise the petition. The petitioners are given 14 days to revise it. Afterward, the evidence is approved. Based on this preliminary hearing, the panel forwards the case to the justice deliberation meeting (RPH), which is attended by at least seven justices. The meeting will decide whether the case continues or not. If the case is continued, the Court will invite the House, the Government, and the Relevant Party.
In the Q&A session, student Nicky Akhita Pianaung asked about the conditions warranting a petition on the dissolution of political parties. Justice Foekh said there hasn’t been any such a petition as there hasn’t been any party whose principles are against Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution.
Andre Pratama asked about the nature of the Constitutional Court’s decisions and the justices’ involvement in drafting a decision. Justice Foekh said that the Court makes decisions in a deliberation meeting. Not all decisions are made unanimously. Dissenting opinions are commonplace, he revealed.
“It is common for justices to have different opinions on a case as they are influenced by the theories and legal principle that each justice abides by in reviewing a petition filed to the Court,” he explained.
Writer: Sri Pujianti
Editor: Nur R.
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 9/25/2020 11:35 WIB
Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian version, the Indonesian version will prevail.
Saturday, September 19, 2020 | 21:40 WIB 205