Tuesday, May 25, 2021 | 14:25 WIB
Advocate Rega Felix conveying the petition revisions at the second judicial review hearing of the Basic Agrarian Law No. 5 of 1960 on Basic Agrarian Law No. 5 of 1960 on Tuesday (25/5/2021). Photo by Humas MK/Bayu.
JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the second judicial review hearing of the Basic Agrarian Law No. 5 of 1960 (UUPA) for case No. 12/PUU-XIX/2021 on Tuesday, May 25, 2021. Advocate Rega Felix (Petitioner) conveyed the revisions to his petition at the hearing chaired by Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul regarding the Court’s authority, a quote of the article to review (Article 23 paragraph (1)), and affirmation of his constitutional impairment to strengthen his legal standing.
“The Petitioner also added Article 28H paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution to the touchstone to review the Basic Agrarian Law No. 5 of 1960,” Rega explained.
He also reduced the petition’s pages and supported his arguments with evidence to strengthen his constitutional impairment. He also revised the petitum that states that the word “peralihan” (“transfer”) is unconstitutional.
Also read: Petitioner Challenges Provision Requiring Ownership Transfer of Asset to Be Funded by Sharia Bank
The Petitioner alleges that Article 23 paragraph (1) of the law is unconstitutional. He believes that it affects sharia banking where land, its transfer, or its encumbrance can be a transaction object. As such, the provision would apply in sharia banking. He believes he has the right to use sharia banking services following his faith and to apply for financing to a sharia bank using a murabahah contract. However, under the a quo norm, sharia banking requires transfer of asset being financed.
The Petitioner revealed that he applied for murabahah financing to buy land to expand his business. He was required to convert a contract that he had signed before. Consequently, he would have to sell the land that he had bought to the bank, who would then lease it to him with a promise to bequeath it at the end of the leasing term. He observed that the ownership transfer would occur multiple times for a single transaction, even up to four times. This would be a huge burden to him as he would have to contend high costs for a long period.
The Petitioner believes the state has the obligation to ensure that transactions carried out by sharia banking have strong legal bases so that the constitutional rights referred to in Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28E paragraphs (1) and (2), as well as Article 29 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the 1945 Constitution are not violated by the enactment of the a quo norm.
Writer : Sri Pujianti
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR : Annisa Lestari
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 5/27/2021 11:53 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.
Tuesday, May 25, 2021 | 14:25 WIB 279