Papuan Man Sues Marriage Law To MK Because Of Failed To Marry Women Of Different Religions, DPR Considers Petitioners' Arguments Unfounded

JAKARTA - Member of Commission III of the DPR, Arsul Sani, called the petitioner's argument in the case of reviewing Law Number 1/1974 concerning Marriage as amended to Law Number 16/2019 concerning Marriage baseless.

"The petitioner's argument that article 2 paragraph 1 of the a quo law is a form of coercion of a certain religion by the state on citizens is an unfounded argument," he said, in Case Number 24/PUU-XX/2022 which was broadcast by the Constitutional Court online. , quoted by Antara, Monday, June 6.

In this case, the applicant on behalf of E Ramos Petege argued that Article 2 paragraph 1 of the Law on Marriage is a form of religious coercion by the state on its citizens.

According to the applicant, it should be interpreted as the choice of a prospective couple who will marry of different religions to make an agreement based on free will that is subject to religious law and certain beliefs in carrying out a marriage.

On this argument, the DPR as one of the parties questioned by the Court gave a number of views. Based on the minutes of the meeting discussing the a quo law, there is a background to the formulation of article 2 of the a quo law which has actually been carried out by each religion.

In other words, marriages performed, recorded and recognized by government officials. "Therefore, the DPR is of the view that the petitioner's argument in article 2 paragraph 1 which states that there is coercion of a certain religion by the state on citizens is completely unfounded," he said.

According to him, the state plays a role in providing protection for families and continuing offspring through legal marriages. It is the embodiment and guarantee of human survival. "Marriage cannot be seen from the formal aspect alone but also from the spiritual and social aspects," he said.

Religion puts it in terms of the validity of a marriage, while the laws that are formed regulate the administrative validity of marriage.

Previously, Petega, a young man from Gabaikunu Village, Central Mapia, Dogiyai Regency, Papua, who sued Law No. 16/2019 concerning Marriage to the Constitutional Court after failing to marry a Muslim woman because of different beliefs.

"After being in a relationship for three years and wanting to get married, it was canceled due to differences in beliefs," said his attorney, Ni Komang Tari Padmawati, at a previous trial.

It is known that Petege is a temporary Catholic, the woman he wants to marry is Muslim.