MKMK Asked Not To Issue Normative Decision

The Constitutional Court's Honorary Court (MKMK) was asked not to issue a normative decision regarding the alleged violation of the constitutional judge's code of ethics.

Constitutional Law Expert at the Faculty of Law, Islamic University of Indonesia, Yogyakarta, Anang Zubaidy assessed, MKMK must consider aspects of benefit and justice. Therefore, they must make decisions that are out of the box or not normative.

According to him, if the basis for decision making is only normative, then the Constitutional Court's decision is final and binding so that it closes other legal remedies and is no longer seen as a mechanism for canceling decisions.

"To be able to restore public trust, MKMK must make decisions that are out of the box, beyond normative considerations, more on consideration of benefit and justice," said Anang, Saturday, November 4.

"If you think normative, it's over. We don't have any legal remedies. I think beyond that, that the law must provide a way out," he continued.

He explained that the MKMK carried out its role as a judge who had the main functions and duties to resolve disputes or conflicts. Therefore, the MKMK should not only use normative glasses.

He hopes that the MKMK will use its conscience to analyze and investigate cases of alleged violations of the ethics of constitutional judges. "MKMK needs to read cases handled from the glasses of justice and benefit," said Anang.