As A Lawyer For The Deli Serdang KLB Camp, Yusril Proposes A Judicial Review Of The Democratic AD/ART To MA

DOC ANTARA/Yusril Ihza Mahendra

JAKARTA - Constitutional law expert and lawyer, Yusril Ihza Mahendra, accompanied four members of the Democrat Party for the Extraordinary Congress (KLB) Deli Serdang to submit a judicial review regarding the 2020 Democratic Articles of Association / Bylaws (AD / ART) to the Court Supreme (MA).

Yusril said the judicial review included formal and material testing of the 2020 Democratic Party's AD/RT which was ratified by the Minister of Law and Human Rights on May 18, 2020.

"Advocates Yusril Ihza Mahendra and Yuri Kemal Fadlullah confirmed media questions that their law office Ihza & Ihza Law Firm SCBD-Bali Office represented the legal interests of four members of the Democratic Party submitting a judicial review to the Supreme Court," Yusril said in his statement as quoted by VOI, Friday. , September 24.

Yusril said, the step to examine the formal and material AD/ART of political parties is a new thing in Indonesian law. He argued that the Supreme Court had the authority to examine the AD/ART of political parties because the AD/ART was made by a political party on the orders of the law and delegates given the Law on Political Parties.

"Well, if the AD/ART of a political party turns out to be the procedure for its formation and the regulatory material is contrary to the law, even contrary to the 1945 Constitution, then what institution has the authority to examine and cancel it? There is a legal vacuum to resolve the above problems," he said.

According to Yusril, the Party Court, which is the party's internal judiciary, has no authority to examine AD/ART. Likewise, the District Court, which has the authority to adjudicate internal political party disputes that cannot be resolved by the Party Court, is not authorized to examine the AD/ART.

In addition, he said, the Administrative Court also could not handle the judicial review of the party's AD/ART. Yusril said that his party had compiled arguments and input from experts that there should indeed be an institution that could examine the AD/ART of political parties to ensure that the procedures for their formation and their content were in accordance with the law or not.

"Because the preparation of AD/ART is not arbitrary because it was formed on the basis of orders and delegation of authority given by the law," he explained.

"I don't think there should be a party that is formed and managed 'at will' by the founders or important figures in it that is legitimized by their AD/ART which turns out to be contrary to the Act and even the 1945 Constitution," he continued.

Yusril added that the Supreme Court had to make legal breakthroughs to examine, try and decide whether the 2020 Democratic Party's Articles of Association/Articles were against the law or not.

"Is the desire of 2/3 of the Democratic Party branch to ask for an Extraordinary Extraordinary Session to be carried out if the High Council agrees, in accordance with the principles of member sovereignty and democracy as regulated by the Political Party Law or not? Great," he said.