Constitutional Court welcoming students and lecturers of the Sharia Faculty of UIN Fatmawati Sukarno Bengkulu, Tuesday (2/22/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ilham W. M.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — How does the Constitutional Court (MK) resolve disputes over the authority of state institutions, between prosecutors and police or investigators? This is one of several questions asked by students of the Faculty of Sharia of Fatmawati Sukarno State Islamic University of Bengkulu (UIN FAS Bengkulu) during a visit to the Court on Wednesday, February 22, 2023.

Answering the question, expert assistant to constitutional justice Ananthia Ayu Devitasari who welcomed them at the Court’s main hall, explained the Court’s authority. The authority of the police/investigators and prosecutors, she said, is not directly stated in the Constitution. Therefore, in juridically, the settlement of disputes between these two institutions is not Court’s authority. However, she emphasized, if the authority of institutions as referred to a Law is questioned, then it falls under the Court’s jurisdiction.

“If the authority of both institutions is stated in laws that regulate their duties and [these laws] become a problem, only then is the Court authorized to resolve the issue through judicial review,” Ayu answered.

Furthermore, Ayu explained in more depth the Courts authority as referred to in Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. It has the authority to adjudicate at the first and final instances, with decisions that are final, to examine laws against the Constitution; to settle disputes over the authority of state institutions (SKLN) whose authority is granted by the Constitution; to decide the dissolution of political parties; to decide disputes over the results of elections; and to decide on the opinion of the House of Representatives (DPR) regarding allegations of violations by the president and/or vice president according to the Constitution. The Court’s authority developed after Decision No. 85/PUU-XX/2022. In this case, it annulled Article 157 paragraph (3) of Law No. 10 of 2016. Thus, now it has the authority to examine and decide disputes over the results of the elections of governors, regents, and mayors (PHP Kada).

Ayu also compared the Court’s authority to resolve SKLN between the KPU (General Elections Commission) and regional governments. It acts as a referee for state institutions whose authority is stated in the Constitution. “However, there are limitations because it only mediates institutions whose authority is stated in the Constitution. So, in this case between the KPU and the Papua regional government, the juridical object and subject existed so the Court could resolve the dispute between these two institutions,” Ayu said in her presentation on “The Dynamics of the Constitutional Court’s Procedural Law.”

Ayu then discussed the Court’s judicial review authority where it can review the lawmaking process (formal judicial review) and the content of clauses, articles, and/or parts of the law deemed to be in conflict with the 1945 Constitution (material judicial review). She added that these two things are outlined in the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2021 on the procedure for the judicial review of laws.

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Nur R.
Translator  : Azzahra Salsabilla/Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---