F-PDIP Members Don't Agree That Commission II Wants To Evaluate The Constitutional Court, Advises The DPR And The President To Repent

DOK ANTARA

JAKARTA - Member of Commission III of the DPR from the PDIP faction, Arteria Dahlan, did not agree with the Chairman of Commission II of the DPR, Ahmad Doli Kurnia, who said that his party would evaluate the position of the Constitutional Court (MK) because it was considered too concerned with matters that were not under his authority.

According to Arteria, the evaluation of the Constitutional Court by the DPR will only cause turmoil, such as what happened related to the ratification of the Pilkada Bill some time ago.

"I think it is very inappropriate to revise the Constitutional Court's laws at a time like this. Especially when the Constitutional Court is in a position to enforce democracy, oversee the constitution. I say this is very risky. Why risk? Don't let new turmoil arise later," said Arteria, Friday, August 30. "We, if we want to change a very sensitive law, it should be carried out with full accuracy and full of solemnity. We are also sensitive to the sense of justice and the current situation," he continued. Arteria assessed, yesterday's decision on the Constitutional Court actually made democracy wider. That, according to him, what the people want.

Therefore, he questioned the attitude of Commission II of the DPR if he wanted to revise the Constitutional Court Law. In fact, Arteria assessed that the DPR and the government must immediately repent.

"I suggest that at this time we carry out narcotics, all of them are people, the president is people, yes the DPR is also people's people," said the Central Java electoral district legislator.

"People give us the opportunity to come back, we all come back to do good, What? Make the law correctly, procedurally, with full accuracy, full of solemnity. What? Implementing the government in accordance with the basic law, in accordance with the law. If we do not use this opportunity, I am worried that the people will take their own path or look for their own path, whether in the context of seeking justice or implementing government functions," explained Arteria.

Previously, Chairman of Commission II of the DPR Ahmad Doli Kurnia said that 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 for the Constitutional Court," said Doli, quoted from Antara, Thursday, August 29.

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.

"Therefore, we need to improve all systems, both elections, institutions and state administration," he concluded.