Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams speaking at a fieldwork webinar organized by Pancasakti University Tegal, Friday (11/6/2021) from the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
Friday, June 11, 2021 | 14:25 WIB
JAKARTA, Public Relations—Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams spoke at a fieldwork (KKL) webinar organized by Pancasakti University Tegal on Friday morning, June 11, 2021 virtually from the Constitutional Court (MK). He delivered a presentation on “The Constitutional Court in the Administration System of the Republic of Indonesia.”
Before talking about the Constitutional Court’s structure and position, Justice Wahiduddin explained constitutionalism. He said the Constitution is the supreme law of the land, which contains the state’s highest ideals.
“The highest ideals are achieved to give justice, order, freedom, prosperity, and welfare to all people proportionately,” he said to the university’s lecturers and students virtually.
He said that the Constitution is the direction and boundaries of implementing democracy. Article 1 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution reads, “Sovereignty is vested in the people and implemented pursuant to the Constitution.” This means that democracy must be within the limits of the law and the Constitution, because without the law, democracy can go to a wrong direction as the law can be interpreted arbitrarily by those in power in the name of democracy. Constitutional democracy then emerged as the ideas of democracy developed alongside that of rechstaat based on legal supremacy (nomocracy).
Importance of Constitution
He then said that a democratic constitution is an important prerequisite as it regulates the limitation of power as a constitutionalism function. In addition, the constitution gives the government legitimacy and serves as an instrument for delegating authority from the holder of the highest sovereignty—the people—to the state organs. Meanwhile, the protection of human rights is also important because human rights are attached to citizens, which every human being has as part of their nature. Meanwhile the rights of citizens arise because of their status as citizens.
“Both rights have a significant point of tangency and so are often mentioned in the constitution and become constitutional rights. The idea of constitutional democracy can be viewed from two perspectives. First, from the relationship between citizens. Second, from the relationship between state institutions and citizens,” he explained.
Constitutional Court’s Structure and Position
Moving on to the Court’s structure and position, Justice Wahiduddin said that the Court was a modern, 20th century idea of the law and constitutionalism.
He explained that Indonesia is the 77th country with a constitutional court when it established the Constitutional Court in 2003. The Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court make up the judiciary. The Constitutional Court was given the authority to review laws against the Constitution at the first and final levels, to decide on authority disputes between state institutions whose authorities were granted by the Constitution, to decide on the dissolution of political parties, and to decide on disputes over general election results. It is also obligated to decide on the House’s (DPR) opinion on an alleged violation of law committed by the president and/or vice president, pursuant to the Constitution.
Aside from those, he added, the Court also settle disputes over regional head elections (pilkada) since 2008. It started when the legislature issued Law No. 22 of 2007 on General Elections, which expanded the definition of general elections in Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution. Since then, pilkada is part of general elections.
The change was then solidified in Law No. 12 of 2008 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 32 of 2004 on the Regional Government. Article 236C in that law mandated that the authority to settle pilkada disputes be transferred from the Supreme Court to the Constitutional Court within 18 months.
“The transfer of authority was then made official by the Chief Justices of the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court on October 29, 2008 by signing the report of authority transfer to adjudicate on regional head election disputes,” he added.
Authority to Settle Pilkada Disputes
Justice Wahiduddin further explained that in 2014, the authority to settle pilkada disputes were revoked by the Constitutional Court through Decision No. 97/PUU-XI/2013, which annulled Article 236C of Law No. 12 of 2008. However, soon it became a political issue of which institution was supposed to take up the authority.
Justice Wahiduddin believes that the Constitutional Court’s transitional authority over pilkada disputes, which ends when a special body is established to take it over, should be distinguished from its practice prior to Decision No. 97/PUU-XI/2013.
“The Constitutional Court’s current task in resolving [pilkada] disputes is to develop models or some kind of prototypes, which will be applied and developed by the special court. Thus, it is necessary to carefully consider whether the matters that the Court have decided in past pilkada can be re-applied. For example, whether in exercising this transitional authority, the Court will also examine structured, systematic, and massive electoral violations or will [it] specifically limit itself to cases of final vote count differences between the petitioner and the election organizers,” he said.
Constitutional Justices’ Integrity
Justice Wahiduddin then said that as the embodiment of a democratic rule of law, an independent and impartial court is a prerequisite that must exist; therefore, maintaining the integrity and behavior of the constitutional justices is important. The Court’s institutional authority is highly dependent on the integrity, independence, and determination of the justices in upholding morality and their oath to carry out their constitutional duties. Therefore, the Constitutional Court must be free; it cannot be influenced by external forces, whether the executive or legislative branches, and parties or opinions that arise in society.
Neutral and Objective
Justice Wahiduddin also said that in carrying out its roles and functions, the Court must be neutral and objective and only subject to constitutional justice and truth. The Court must also maintain and develop itself as a modern, fast, simple, and free judicial body. Case administration and information technology systems that allow the public to access justice easily and without cost must be guaranteed, supported by quality, trustworthy, and transparent human resources. Such easy access is imperative of modern judiciary.
“Last, the Court plays an important role in becoming an instrument of democracy needed by all citizens to protect their constitutional rights. Therefore, the Court must provide the widest possible opportunity for the entire community to make use of it in the constitutional system. This can be done by continuing to develop the proceedings and carry out in a modern, fast, simple, and free manner the management of court hearings, litigation time, and simple procedures for filing and examining petitions,” Justice Wahiduddin concluded.
Writer : Utami Argawati
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 6/14/2021 15:09 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.
Friday, June 11, 2021 | 14:25 WIB 567