Emergency Warning! Beware Of The DPR Maneuvering The Constitutional Court Evaluation, Don't Let The Court Be Bomped

JAKARTA - Trisakti University Public Policy Observer Dr. Trubus Rahardiansyah said the discourse of the DPR which would evaluate the Constitutional Court (MK) would not be a problem as long as it did not revoke its main function.

"Don't make ultra petitums or new decisions again. Because it's as if the Constitutional Court made its own law. So that's what I think needs to be changed, and if that's okay," Trubus said as quoted by ANTARA, Friday, August 30.

Trubus emphasized that when there is a discourse from the DPR that will evaluate the position of the Constitutional Court in the medium and long term because it is considered doing many affairs that are not under its authority, it is not a problem.

Because the duties of the Constitutional Court are in accordance with Trubus's follow-up law, there are six authorities including testing the 1945 Constitution, deciding disputes over the authority of state institutions whose powers are granted by the 1945 Constitution, and several other authorities.

According to him, as long as the authority is still owned by the Constitutional Court, there is no problem, because so far many people think that the Constitutional Court seems to make its own rules, even though the ones authorized to form the law are the DPR and the Government.

"Later, if all the Constitutional Courts are revoked, it will be barren, sorry for our society. Because when the DPR is controlled by a coalition, all laws and regulations are made as they wish without thinking about the community. Therefore, the Constitutional Court is still needed to test the law, not make laws," he said.

Previously, Chairman of Commission II of the DPR Ahmad Doli Kurnia Tandjung said his institution would evaluate the position of the Constitutional Court in the medium and long term because it was considered to be doing many affairs that were not under his authority.

"Later we will evaluate the position of the Constitutional Court because we should evaluate everything about the system, from the electoral system to the state administration system. In my opinion, the Constitutional Court has done too much business, which is actually not a matter of the Constitutional Court," said Doli in a statement received in Jakarta, Thursday (29/8).

According to Doli, one example is about regional elections. According to him, the Constitutional Court should review Law Number 10 of 2016 concerning Pilkada which is contrary to the 1945 Constitution, but in the end the Constitutional Court is also included in technical matters, so it is considered to exceed the limits of its authority.

"In addition, there are many decisions that take the authority of the DPR as the maker of the law. The maker of the law is only the Government and the DPR, but it is as if the Constitutional Court is the maker of the third law," he said.

He said the DPR would change the hierarchy of laws and regulations because the Constitutional Court's decision was final and binding.

"As a result, the Constitutional Court's decision raises new political efforts and legal remedies that must be adopted by technical regulations, as was the case with yesterday's decision. However, when the DPR wants to position the correct ones according to the law, student demonstrations and suspicions arise," he said.