Key Benefits:
betrayed TAP Number 1/MPR/1983 and Act Number 5/1985, and TAP
XVIII/MPR/1998, as well as a transplant/transplant
idiology and foreign culture that are identical "liberalistic" repeats
failure of UUDS (1950-1959); which with as well as merta erasing
most of the original 1945 Constitution provisions that only
retains it as much as 25 provisions (12.5%) while as much
174 provisions is a new provision (87.5%), which is said to be
The amendment ", with no explanation in UUD1945. which
new (amendment results) at all. His next day, forget the convention
5
national with the absence of TAP MPR mandates about it,
and also without its disabations in the State News Sheet. The check
is now that the Pancasila is only used as a pilar.MPR as if to close the eyes
The presence of polemics in a prolonged society.
2. Indeed the change itself is a sunatullah as
the Hindu teaching "Panta Rei", that change is what
eternal, truly as the State of Nationality, Country
by law (rechstaat) in carrying out the changes
should have always been enlightened by Kemaha Hadiran GOD SERU
The identical nature of nature has value "Perfection-Perfected"
(perfecting the perfect one "or" Hogore op trakking ".
It was supposed to be that by MPR instead of being counter productive
and or containing a lot of the efficacy for the nation and country
Pancasila.
3. In rewarding and carrying out the 1945 Constitution is not sufficient only
by reading the textual in its own pasts alone, it must be
knows the background of its creation, how it must be
understanding the atmosphere The limit. Preambule UUD 1945 is the
"The fundamental Kaidah of the State". Identical to the manner of thinking that
comprehensive, in sensu abstracto-in sensu stricto. The provisions in
The Basic Law of 1945 are reflections, reinterpretation,
reactualization and revitalization of PREAMBULE UUD 1945 or mukadimah
UUD 1945 laden with minds of the mind that had become a soul.
the nation and the demands of the Indonesian people who are the clues
the execution (juklak) in the nation-state and country-life.
Even though it has undergone a variety of UUD changes such as: UUD RIS
(1949); UUDS (1950); back again to UUD 1945 on July 5, 1959 and
after 40 years there were four times more changes each on
19/10/99; 18/08/00; 09/11/01 and last on 10/08/02 toh opening
The bill remains timeless. There are four fundamental rules that need
be noticed according to the paragraph:
The passage of Alinea 1 reads: " That truly independence is the right
of all nations and therefore, the colonization of the world
6
must be abolished, as it does not correspond to the humanities
and peri-justice ".
This is the fact that this nation has since begun to realize
the presence of the most civil rights for any human and or
nations about the "universal human rights" or human rights,
it is not only a personal or individual right
How a declaration for a liberal state will be but also
is the right of every nation in the world then this Alinea I becomes
the base and reason for the need That independence.
The passage of Alinea II reads: " And the struggle of the independence movement
Indonesia has come to a happy moment with
happy sentausa delivering the Indonesian people to the doorstep
the gates of Indonesia's independence, independent, united,
sovereign, fair and prosperous ".
This paragraph describes at the time of the proclamation of the proclamation
it was announced, where the tarf of the struggle has come to so far,
to realize the true independent independence of
departure for the sake of the cause. created sovereignty for justice and
the prosperity could be made.
The passage of Alinea 3 reads: " For the blessings of the Almighty God and
by being driven by a sublime desire, that life
Free nationality, then Indonesian people declare
with this Its independence.
Alinea III is clearly an affirmation and more details
continue on the Proclamation of 17 August 1945. Therefore already
affirmed by Bung Karno that among Proclamation with
The opening of the 1945 Constitution is an unconstitutional loro-lorone that is not
could be split-separate because only Indonesios are the ones that have
"Proclamation of Independence", as well as "Declaration of
Independence". And this Alinea III illustrates the subject
-the subject of the mind that is reflected in the chapters and sections
-section in the underlying Invite-Invite itself, which is
instructions for the execution in Nation and country to
The creation of protection from the State for the whole nation and
7
covers the entire Indonesian nation's blood spill for
The form of social justice for the entire Indonesian people, which
independent, sovereign, fair and prosperous (special purpose). More goals
The international international is in the process
world order based on independence, eternal peace and
social justice (general).
the paragraph of Alinea 4 reads: " Then from on it to form an
Government of the State of Indonesia that protects all the nation
Indonesia and all Indonesian blood spills and to
advance the general welfare enlighten the nation ' s life
and co-implement the world order which is based
independence, eternal peace and social justice, then
discontinue the Indonesian national independence it is in an
Act Indonesian base, which formed in an
arrangement of the State of the Republic of Indonesia The people who are fighting the people
by virtue of the God Almighty, Humanity
the fair and the civilized, Unity of Indonesia, and the Axis
led by wisdom of wisdom in
Consultative/Representative, as well as by realising an
social justice for the entire Indonesian people ".
Alinea IV, gamblang has been mandated to have: (1).
The purpose of a special good state that contain2
June 1945 with the number of 21 members, who on 18 August 1945
still plus 6 people. While the other UUD is a UUD
1945 amendment results. MPR as a manifestation of the rightful owner of the rightful owner
The sovereignty of the people who are no longer the Supreme Society of the State instead
creating a massive new chaos paska of birth date
has been changed The then-ongoing August 18, 1945 continues
by willfully executing anarchism against the country's constitution
consequently, the state has already occurred " DECONSTITUTIONALITY;
DENATIONALISATION; DE-NPKRI; DEEMACILAZATION ", in nature of the era
reforms implemented with misguided paths and paths without
heeding the existence of the plenary reform demands (which would not
mandates the change ence
should be obtained by everyone in particular the WNI.
Verse (2): " Everyone has the right to advance her in
fight for her right. collectively to build a society
and its country ".
To advance myself and fight for consistent right
acknowledges that Pancasila is a non-pillar basis then
there will be a C of understanding, C of interest and a c of the c of
The potentially divisive orientation of unity and unity
nation.
11
(3). Article 28D paragraph (1). Each person is entitled to the recognition, guarantee,
protection, and fair legal certainty as well as the same treatment in
before the law.
In this description, if specifically, the MPR has
previalge differentiates with the people in which it is always
is made the object, if this is left to continue then the legal certainty
slow laun will be confused and confusing in the middle of the country.
stands declare as a legal state, the national state is not
country (which speaks) democracy, because it is merely a mere tool.
Article 28E verse (2): 'Everyone is entitled to the freedom of belief
trust, state of mind and attitude, in accordance with its conscience'.
Well, the law is The causality of the articles tested by this material then as
The citizens no longer have the belief that
The Pancasila as the basis is not the pillar to be shackled.
Verse (3): " Every people are entitled to the freedom of union, assemble and
issue an opinion ".
Then this material test is the right to the applicant as a person of the WNI
which is the element of the nation, which is called to uphold
the truth as the embodiment of the KAM (Human Rights Act) Citizens
The State of Indonesia), in order for human rights with KAM to be comparable in
This Pancasila state.
Article 28H verse (4): Everyone has a right to have a personal property and
That property should not be Authorized by
anyone.
The right here is not ansih only as material or physic/matter
alone, due to private property rights, as the editoration of the child
nation, which believes that Pancasila as a living view nation,
way of life, the philosophy of the nation, the spirit and personality of the nation, the purpose of founding
nations and states, the nation's luhur agreements on that right were
being taught by our predecessors then and merta Taken by
The MPR jumpness with 4 pillars of the nation and the country.
Article 28I paragraph (2): Everyone is entitled to be free from the treatment that
discriminates on any basis and is entitled to a protection
against that discriminatory treatment. Verse (3): Cultural identity
12
and the rights of traditional peoples are respected in harmony with the development
age and civilization. Verse (5): To enforce and protect the rights
human rights in accordance with the principles of a democratic law state, then
the exercise of human rights is guaranteed, regulated, and poured in
the laws.
Well with MPR imposing the socialization of the babes and heretics
the path that uses non-small people's money, then
accidentally this high institution has been discriminating against which
antipilarization of Pancasila verse (2). While verse (3) can be explained
that Pancasila with a truly high status and function
and the multi function that has become a hallmark of the nation's sublime civilisation
Indonesia even the Vatican throne Once you put the word that Pancasila
is the biggest Indonesian contribution to the world in
the spiritual field, then it will be dead because we have
national betrays the Pancasila. Alone. At least Sila IV.
which is led by wisdom wisdom
Consultative/representative, has been quizsed by making
The nation is only composed of the political party elite alone. While emissaries
regions and group elements including indigenous peoples, and representatives
pamengkukraton se-nusantara whose land of power since Proclamation
is donated to the country as well as those of the allergy golpumates. against
The political party as it is no longer a nation ' s element. What is true
nation, gotong royong, familial, deliberation, mufakat and
representation and others. It's her grave and waiting for her with
be in the transplant of a foreign idiology which is not entirely his own
that is the idiological "liberalistic" as the biological son of the individualistic
is a grandson. From capitalism that remains the nature and soul
"nekolim" that is now so powerful with the serum "globalization"
rests on "free trade" instead of "fair trade" that manifests
who is He's the one who wins This is the nature of the family, gotong
royong do not know any more, whereas the spirit and soul are
gives birth to Proclamation.
Article 28J verse (2): " In exercising his rights and freedom, every
persons are subject to the restrictions set forth with the Invite-
13
Invite with intent solely to warrant recognition as well as
respect for the rights and liberties of others and to meet
fair demands in accordance with moral considerations, religious values,
Security, and public order in a democratic society ".
MPR has been negligently over the mandate of this section, fair word and moral consideration
it seems not to be understood by it, is that Pancasila spiritually
is the flame of Islam and also as fulfillment of the laws of love
Divine? .which is supposed to place Pancasila as basic and
the guidelines are not just a buffer pole or a pillar though
The basic application is the same as the pillar as per the dictionary it
field without understanding the awkness of the existing society.
The applicant is very Appreciate MPR (2009-2014) Ssurpass
so, should be extra careful in reinterpretation and
reactualize and revitalize it by creating a
term that should be clear and firm. In the absence of multi interpretation, because
the public knew that PANCASILA was a "state base"
which is a legal source of the law as the TAP Number
1/MPR/1983 that has been promulred with Law Number 5/1985, which also
mandated in TAP Number XVIII/MPR/1998.Is less elok if
MPR Propagating for example with jargon: " Let's do it and
biodiversity in the fairy of the nation's life and countrveryone is entitled to develop oneself through
fulfillment of its basic needs, entitled to education and
benefits from science and technology, art and
culture, in order to improve the quality of the her life for the welfare of mankind
man.
How the basic fate of the "PANCASILA" state is also
sources from all sources including applied sciences such as " Economy
Pancasila; Pancasila philosophy; Pancasila democracy etc.
The extraordinary must be lost, raib, nir or otherwise as sci Act No. 27 of 2009 on the Assembly
People's Consultative Assembly, House of Representatives, Council
Regional Representative, and the Regional People's Representative Council;
17
2. Evidence P-2 Photocopy of the State Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia
Year 1945;
3. Evidence P-3 Photocopying Attachment-Reason class Action For Pancasila
Is Made Up Of A pillar in the Republic and Republic of the Republic
Indonesia;
4. Evidence P-4 Photocopied Book Quak Mystery: Proclamation, Sukarno Is
Indonesia And Indonesia Are Sukarno As Well As Election
President, A Philosophical Renungan;
5. Proof of p-5 Photocopy Testament Man Hatta about Pancasila To Goentoer
Sukarno Putra;
6. Evidence P-6 Photocopied Joint Statement with Sukarno and M. Hatta.
[2.3] weighed that to shorten the description in this ruling,
everything that happened at the trial was quite appointed in the news of the event
the trial which is one unbreakable unity with
this verdict;
3. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
[3.1] Draw that the intent and purpose of the applicant's plea
is to invoke the testing of the constitutionality of the norm Article 15 paragraph (1) letter
e Act Number 27 Year 2009 about the Assembly Deliberations
People, People's Representative Council, Regional Representative Council, and Board
Regional People's Representative (Indonesian Republic) (2009)
Number 123, Additional Gazette Number 5043, subsequently called Act
27/2009) against the Opening, Article 27 paragraph (1), Section 28C paragraph (1) and paragraph (2),
Section 28D paragraph (1), Article 28E paragraph (2) and paragraph (3), Section 28H paragraph (4), Section 28I
paragraph (2), paragraph (3), and paragraph (5), Section 28J paragraph (2), Section 29 of the paragraph (1), as well as Article
30 paragraph (1) of the Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia 1945
(subsequently called UUD 1945);
[3.2] weighed that before considering the subject's subject,
The Constitutional Court (later called the Court) was first going
consider:
18
a. The Court's authority to prosecute the a quo;
b. legal standing (legal standing) of the applicant to submit
a request for a quo;
Against those two, the Court considers it
following:
The Court's authority
[3.3] Weighing that under Article 24C paragraph (1) of the Constitution of 1945, Article 10
paragraph (1) of the letter a Law Number 24 of 2003 on the Court
The Constitution as amended by Act Number 8 of the Year
2011 on Changes to the Law No. 24 of 2003 concerning
Constitutional Court (Sheet Nation of Republic of Indonesia Year 2011 number
70, Additional Gazette Republic of Indonesia Number 5226, next
called Act MK), and Article 29 paragraph (1) letter a Law No. 48 Year
2009 on the Power of Justice
No. 157, Additional Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number
5076, subsequently called Act 48/2009), one of the constitutional authorities
The court is courting at the rate of the Republic of Indonesia. first and last of its verdict
is final to test the Act against The Basic Law;
[3.4] Draws That The Applicant's plea is testing
constitutionality of the norm Act, in casu Section 15 paragraph (1) letter e Act
27/2009, thus, the Court of Law for To judge the application
a quo;
Occupation (Legal Standing) The petitioners
[3.5] A draw that under Article 51 of the paragraph (1) MK Act is and
The explanation, which may apply. testing of the Act
against UUD 1945 is those who consider rights and/or the authority
its constitutionality given by UUD 1945 is harmed by the enactment of a
Act, i.e.:
a. Individuals in Indonesia (including groups of people
have common interests);
19
b. the unity of the indigenous law society as long as it is alive and in accordance with
the development of the society and the principle of the Republic of the Republic of Indonesia
which is set in Undang-Undang;
c. the public or private legal entity;
d. state agencies;
Thus, the applicant in testing the Act against
The 1945 Constitution must explain and prove first:
a. The position of the applicant is referred to in Article 51 of the paragraph
(1) of the MK Act;
b. the constitutional rights and/or constitutional authority granted by the Constitution
1945 resulting from the enactment of the required Act
testing;
[3.6] The Court has also been held since the Court's ruling
Constitution Number 006 /PUU-III/2005 dated 31 May 2005 and the ruling
Constitutional Court Number 11 /PUU-V/2007 dated September 20, 2007,
and subsequent rulings established that loss of rights and/or
authority constitutional as referred to in Article 51 of paragraph (1) Act
MK must meets five terms, that is:
a. the rights and/or constitutional authority of the applicant given by
Constitution of 1945;
b. the rights and/or constitutional authority by the applicant is considered
aggrieved by the enactment of the testing Act;
c. the constitutional loss must be specific (special) and actual or
At least a potential that according to reasonable reasoning can be confirmed
will occur;
d. the presence of causal relationships (causal verband) between the intended losses
and the expiring of the testing Act;
e. It is possible that with the request of a request then
constitutional losses such as those that are postulate will not or no longer occur;
[3.7] Draw that based on the description as it is on
paragraph [3.5] and paragraph [3.6] above, next the Court will
20
considering the legal standing (legal standing) the applicant
in the a quo plea which postulate the things as follows:
a. The applicant is an individual of Indonesian citizens;
b. The applicant is aggrieved for the existence of Article 15 of the paragraph (1) letter e
Act 27/2009 stating, "The head of the MPR is in charge: ... e.
coordinate members of the MPR to create the Act
The Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945; ... " as a cause of
the four pillars of the nation and the country, namely: Pancasila, UUD
1945, the Union State of the Republic of Indonesia, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika.
According to the petitioners, Pancasila as the base of the state has been obscured and
buried only as a "Pillars";
c. MPR has used considerable people's money in the socialization of
the mandate of Article 15 of the paragraph rs as pillars. Thus the potential
conflict may have been banned from as early as possible.
On the obscured of this request we set a sense of gratitude that
in depth. And I'm sorry to say that there's an unobscene, indecent greeting. Dharma eva hota hanti and Karmane fa dikaraste mapalesyu kadatjana.
[2.2] A draw that in order to prove its control, the applicant
has submitted a proof of letter/writing that was given the proofs of P-1 to
with P-6 evidence, as follows:
1. Proof of P-1 Photocopy (1) of the Act of 27/2009 which is precisely the target, wrong
way, misdirection, and ineffective;
[3.8] weighed that by Based on Section 51 of the paragraph (1) of the Act
MK and associated with previous rulings, as well as the damages
the constitutionality experienced by the applicant, according to the Court, the
The applicant as a person of the citizen Indonesia, prima facie, have
constitutional rights that are considered harmed. by the enactment of the norm in the Act
27/2009 that the applicant is required for testing, so the petitioners have
legal standing (legal standing) to apply for a quo;
[3.9] The draw that by the The Court of Justice is prosecuting
a quo plea and the applicant has a legal standing (legal standing)
to apply for a quo, next the Court will
consider the subject;
principal application
[3.10] weighing that the petitioners Postulate, Section 15 of the paragraph (1) letter
e UU 27/2009 which states, "The head of the MPR is in charge of: ... e.
coordinate MPR members to community the Basic Law
The Republic of Indonesia in 1945; ... " as a cause of
the four pillars of the nation and the country, namely: Pancasila, UUD
1945, the Unity State of the Republic of Indonesia, and the Bhinneka Tunggal Ika. According to
21
The petitioners, Pancasila as the base of the state have been obscured and buried
only as "Pilar";
[3.11] In a draw that the petitioners in his application are
pledging to the Court: "Declared that Act Number 27
in 2009 on MPR-DPR-DPD where Section 15 of the paragraph (1) letter e
' Establits that one of the duties of the MPR Leadership is ordinating
MPR Member for
In 1945. Contemplating is correcting
members of the MPR to make the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Basic Law
In 1945 at the time of the task and authority on its pitch
Each. Specified by law and or no longer have
the power of the law is binding and mandates the MPR to revise
with the new";
[3.12] A draw that the intent and purpose of the application The applicant
is in order to be in correctional by the MPR, the Pancasila is not mentioned as
"pillar", by testing the constitutionality of the norm Article 15 paragraph (1) of the letter e UU
27/2009 stating, "The head of the MPR is in charge: ... e. coordinate
members of the MPR to the people of the Constitution of the Republic of the Republic
Indonesia Tahun 1945; ... ". According to the Court, the norm Article 15 paragraph (1) of the letter e
The Act of 27/2009 is not directly related to the intent and purpose of the application
the applicant a quo, so that the applicant ' s request is not appropriate between
the intent and purpose of a plea to the norm that is being asked to be tested. In addition to
that, the petitioners request that the Court acknowledge
Article 15 of the paragraph (1) Act of 27/2009: " ... void by law and or not again
has a binding legal force and gives the mandate to the MPR for
revise it with new ones " also unclear. As such, the request
the applicant a quo is blurred (obscuur);
4. KONKLUSI
Based on the assessment of the facts and laws as described in
above, the Court concluded:
[4.1] The court is authorized to prosecute the a quo;
22
[4.2] The applicant has a legal position (legal standing) for
applying for a quo;
[4.3] The applicant's request is blurred;
Based on the State Basic Law Republic of Indonesia Year
1945, Act No. 24 of 2003 on Constitutional Court
as amended by Law No. 8 of 2011 on
Changes to the Law Number 24 Year 2003 concerning Court
Constitution (State Of The Republic Of Indonesia In 2011 Number 70,
Additional Gazette Republic Indonesia Number 5226), and Invite-
Invite Number 48 Year 2009 On The Power Of Justice (State Sheet
Republic Of Indonesia 2009 Number 157, Extra State Sheet
Republic Indonesia Number 5076);
5. AMAR RULING
Prosecuting,
Declaring the applicant is not acceptable.
So it was decided in a Meeting of Judges by nine
Constitutional Justice M. Akil Mochtar, as Chairman Arrested Members,
Achmad Sodiki, Hamdan Zoelva, Anwar Usman, Muhammad Alim, Arief Hidayat,
Harjono, Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi, and Maria Farida Indrati, respectively as
Members, at Monday, twenty-fourth date, respectively. month June, year two
thousand thirteen, and spoken in plenary session The Constitutional Court is open
to the public on Thursday, the twenty-seventh date, in June, year two
thousand thirteen, finished pronounced at 16.15 WIB, by eight Judges
Constitution is M. Akil Mochtar, as the Chief of the Members, Achmad
Sodiki, Hamdan Zoelva, Anwar Usman, Muhammad Alim, Arief Hidayat, Ahmad
Fadlil Sumadi, and Maria Farida Indrati, respectively as Members, with
accompanied by Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono as the Panitera Replacement, attended by
23
The applicant/power, the Government or the representing, and the House of Representatives
The people or the representing.
CHAIRMAN,
ttd.
M. Akil Mochtar
MEMBERS,
ttd.
Achmad Sodiki
ttd.
Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi
ttd.
Anwar Usman
ttd.
Hamdan Zoelva
ttd.
Maria Farida Indrati
ttd.
Muhammad Alim
ttd.
Arief Hidayat
PANITERA REPLACEMENT,
ttd.
Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono
