26 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The farm obtained from the private provided distribution channel

remains charged for pay. In terms of no water sources

another, the option is limited to the private-supplied distribution system.

The explanation of Article 26 of the paragraph (7), states: "In question

The guiding principle pays the cost of the services The management is the recipient

The benefits take place for the management of good water resources

directly or indirectly. This provision is not enforced to

Water users for the fulfillment of the daily staple needs and

the people's farm as referred to in Article 80 ". Explanation of the Article

80 paragraph (1) and paragraph (3), states: paragraph (1) Water resource user

to meet the unburdened daily needs of the daily principal

The water resource management service is the user water resources that

use water on or take water for its own purposes from

A water source that is not a distribution channel. And the verse (3) calculations

The rational economy that can be accounted for is the calculation

that pays attention to the elements a. investment depreciation fee, b.

amortization and interest in investment, c. operation and maintenance, and d. for

development of water resources.

25. That Section 45 and Section 46 of the a quo Act provide the right

the company of the company, the business entity, or cooperation between

the business entity in the form of a water resource enterprise. Section 45 of the paragraph

(2) states: " Water resource enterprise in addition to is intended

paragraph (2) may be performed by individuals, business entity, or cooperation

interagency based on the enterprise permit of the Government or

Local government in accordance with its authority ". That Article 46 paragraph

(1) states: " The Government or Regional Government is appropriate

Its authority, set and set the allocation of water on the source of the water

for the company's water resource enterprise or the individual

as referred to in Article 45 of paragraph (3) ".

26. That based on the description above, it is known that

the a quo Act already provides a private space for the

private (body and enterprise) to master the water resources.

granting rights to the private to master of water resources

is outlined by this Act through a permit for effort. Rights

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

29 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

b. intended for the purposes of groups that require deep water

large amounts; or used for folk farming outside of the system

existing irrigation.

c. lzin as referred to in paragraph (2), provided by

Government or Local Government in accordance with

its authority.

d. The right to use water as referred to in verse (1) includes

the right to stream water from or to its soil through the ground

another person bordering the land.

33. Section 9, stating: (1) The right of Guna Air Business may be provided to

the individual or the business entity with the permission of the Government or

The Local Government is in accordance with its authority. (2) Rights of the Rights

Guna Water Business may deliver water above the land of another person

based on the consent of the rights holder to the land

concerned. (3) The Agreement as referred to in paragraph (2) may

in the case of a loss or compensation agreement. Article 10: The provisions

regarding the rights to water as referred to in Article 7, Section 8

and Article 9 are further regulated by Government regulations.

34. That explanation of Article 8 of the Law Number 7 of 2004 essentially gives

limits on the daily needs of the daily principal and farm of the people for water.

The explanation of Article 8 of the paragraph (1): " Which is meant by the principal needs

everyday is water to meet the daily life needs that

used on or taken from a water source (not from a distribution channel)

for its own purposes in order to achieve a healthy, clean and

productive life, for example for needs of worship, drinking, cooking, bathing, washing,

and peturasan. The people's farm is the power ' s mind

agriculture which includes a range of commodities namely crop farms

food, fisheries, farms, plantations, and forestry managed

by the people with a certain broad Whose water needs are no more than 2

litres per second per family head ".

35. That is, based on that, it can be suggested that,

the existence of the right to be in Law No. 7 of 2004 is fundamentally

reconstructing the value of the water that is public goods (common good)

being (commercial good) economic commodity (commercial good) that can be ruled

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

30 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

a group of individuals and a body of effort. By having the right to effort

over the sources, the private water maintainer gains an advantage;

36. That of the right to be the basic instrument in Law No. 7

This year 2004 adopted the instrument "water rights" in policy

the World Bank's water sector. The right to, the same principle and its settings

with the water right instrument, is the basis for the implementation of the "commercialization of water";

37. That Instarumen rights use sets the limits of water usage

for the daily needs of the subjects and for the people's agriculture. Invite-

Invite a quo and the Government Regulation which will follow

provides a limitation for both non-use water uses.

While it is mentioned use of water for both non-use of non

efforts That is, with these limits, the shape and amount

the activity of water usage by a society is narroer than before

a a quo;

38. That activities by communities outside of such limits and

private enterprise, are categorized as commercial activity and

are charged with obtaining a rights permit. Use of water in

the category of rights for effort is charged. The more narrow the shape and

the amount of water use by the public in the non-venture category, then

the greater the availability of water for the use of the business

commercial. The limit of the shape and volume of water limits in the Invite-

Invite this, then the allocation of water for commercial importance will be increasingly

large. Thus the water sources will be concentrated to

a group of capital owners with commercial purposes. Community efforts

to increase prosperity and quality of life were hampered

with the limitation.

39. That based on the description above, the applicant concludes

that Section 6, Section 7, Article 8, Article 9 and Article 10 of Law No. 7 Year

2004 containing water use charges for the benefit

the commercial containing water as a commercial commodity is

contrary to Article 33 of the paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

31 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

4. The a quo Act contains a charge that triggers a horizontal conflict 40. That further Article 29 paragraph (2), Article 48 paragraph (1), Article 49 of the paragraph (1)

Act No. 7 of 2004 is contrary to the soul and spirit

Opening of the 1945 Constitution for triggering and potentially causing

conflict between the Government Interalia conflict of society. Article 48 paragraph (1)

Act Number 7 of 2004 stated: " Water resource enterprise

in a river region undertaken by building and/or

using the distribution channel can only be used for use. region

other rivers if there is still available water availability

The needs of the population on the river region are concerned. " Next

Article 49 paragraph (1) Law No. 7 Year 2004 on stating:

" water company for other countries is not permitted, unless

provision for various needs as intended in

Article 29 paragraph (2) has been able to be fulfilled ".

41. That such articles may trigger conflicts between the river region

in particular between areas of the river that are identical to the administrative region.

The river region is identical to certain administrative regions,

surely it can be Suggest a selfish argument

exploiting water for the activities of a venture, such as water company

minerals, beverage companies in packaging, hydropower plant,

as contained in Explanation of Law Number 7 2004 Part I

General points 10, or even to be exported abroad such as

possible under Article 49 of Law Number 7 of 2004.

As a result, it could be in the interest of the exploitation and export of water more

less than distributing water to residents of the region

other rivers that require especially for the underlying needs. This

is clearly contrary to Article 28I UUD 1945

5. The a quo eliminates the state ' s responsibility in fulfillment of water needs 42. That Article 9 paragraph (1) Act No. 7 of 2004 states: "Guna's right

Water efforts can be given to an individual or a body of enterprise ....."

That Article 40 paragraph (4) states: " Operations, private enterprise entity,

and the public may play a role as well as in the staging

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

32 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

development of the drinking water supply system ". Next Article 40 paragraph

(7) states, " to achieve the goal of development arrangement

system of drinking water supply ..... The government can form a body

that is below and is responsible to the Minister who

drugging the water resources ".

43. That Section 45 (3): "The company of water resources other than

as referred to in the paragraph (2) may be performed by the individual,

the entity of .....". Furthermore, in an explanation of Article 45 of the paragraph (3)

stated: "...... the license of the company contains the substance allocation

water and/or the field (the part) of the source of the water that can be carried out". While

Article 45 verse (4) states: " The company referred to

in paragraph (3) can be shaped: (a) the use of water at a location

certain .....; (b) utilization of the water container at a certain location .....; (c)

The utilization of water power at a specific location ...... ". That Article 46

paragraph (2) states: "The allocation of water for the company ..... is set in

the water resource enterprise permit of the Government or Government

Regions".

44. That further Article 29 paragraph (5) of Law No. 7 of 2004

states: if the setting of the priority order of the resource provision

water as referred to in paragraph (4) poses a loss to

the water resource user, The government or local government is mandatory

set up compensation to the wearer ".

45. That Section 29 paragraph formula (5) of the Law Number 7 of 2004

has implications if at a time the order of priority is changed and this

affects the individual and/or the legal entity that has been

given the right to work over the water, the Government is obliged to provide

compensation. While compensation from the Government comes from

The State/Regional Revenue and Shopping Budget (APBN/D) which

sources of its income, among others comes from public money

46. That article in the Law Number 7 of 2004 showed

that the production branch that is essential for the country that controls people

many can be uncontrolled by the state. Therefore, the provisions of the Act

No. 7 of 2004 were contrary to Article 33 of the paragraph (2)

Constitution of 1945. Furthermore, the provisions of the Act No. 7 of 2004

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official reference or evidence. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

33 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

it causes water as a state asset and a national asset can

be used not for the great prosperity of the people but to

a greater of personal prosperity and/or legal entity private/

private even individual and/or private private/private legal entity.

Hence Article 9 of the paragraph (1), Section 29 paragraph (5), Section 40 paragraph (4) and paragraph

(7), Section 45 of the paragraph (3) and paragraph (4), Section 46 of the paragraph (2) Act Number 7 Year

2004 is contrary to Article 33 of the paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution.

6. The a quo is a discriminatory Act 47. That article 91 of the Law No. 7 of 2004 stated " Instancy

The government that encodes water resources acting to

the public interest in the case of a community indication

due to water contamination and/or damage. the source of the water that

affects community life ".

48. That Article 92 paragraph (1) Act No. 7 of 2004 stated:

" The organization that moves on the field of water resources is entitled

filing a lawsuit against the person or body of the venture that does

the activities that cause source damage water power and/or

its infrastructure, for the purposes of sustainability of the water resource function ".

Then Article 92 of the paragraph (2) states: " The lawsuit is limited to

a lawsuit to undertake certain actions relating to

the sustainability of the water resource function and/or the lawsuit pays a fee

over expenses real. " Further Article 91 paragraph (3) states:

" the organization entitled to file a lawsuit ... must meet

requirements: (a) the form of a statesuberous organization

the legal entity and move in the field of water resources, (b)

listing the organization's founding objectives in its base budget

for interests related to the sustainability of the source functions

the power of the water ... ", and (c) have done activities according to the budget

essentially".

49. That article 91 of the Law Number 7 of 2004 has been derogatory and

melimitation of everyone's right to maintain life and

his life, contrary to the provisions of the 1945 Constitution that guarantees

of every person and collectively maintain its fundamental rights,

contrary to the guarantee of independence of the mind and conscience of any

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

34 COPIES OF THE RULING Constitutional Court RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

citizens, as well as contrary to the guarantee of each person's right to

communicate and convey information with using everything

types of channels available, including judicial channels, with

filing a lawsuit.

50. That the inclusion of the word "organization that moves in the field of source

water power" as stated in Article 92 of Law Number 7 of the Year

2004 has violated the most underlying principle in enforcement

the law is recognition and guarantee, protection and legal certainty

the fair and the same treat in front of the law as

stated in the 1945 Constitution inter alia provisions Article 92 paragraph (1) Act

Number 7 of the Year 2004 is a discriminatory article. Thus

Article 92 paragraph (1) Act No. 7 of 2004 is contrary to the Article

28I paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution

IV. Petitum

Based on those reasons above, the applicant pleads to

the Constitutional Court of Justice of the Constitutional Court to examine, prosecute and decide

a plea a quo with amar ruling which reads as following:

1. Accept and grant the Applicant Request for the whole;

2. Declaring Law No. 7 of 2004 on Water Resources

contradictory overall with the 1945 Constitution

3. Declaring Law No. 7 of 2004 on Water Resources

does not have a binding legal force overall

4. Ordering the loading of this verdict in the News of the Republic of Indonesia as per provision

applicable laws.

Or drop an alternative ruling, that is:

1. Accept and grant the applicant's request for the whole;

2. Represent Section 6, Section 7, Section 8, Section 9, Article 10, Section 26, Section 29

paragraph (2) and paragraph (5), Article 45, Article 46, Section 48 of the paragraph (1), Section 49 of the paragraph (1),

Article 80, Section 91, and Section 92 of the paragraph (1), paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) Invite-

Invite Number 7 Year 2004 on Water Resources is contrary

with UUD 1945;

3. Declaring Section 6, Section 8, Section 8, Section 9, Section 10, Article

26, Section 29 paragraph (2) and paragraph (5), Article 45, Section 46, Section 48 of the paragraph (1), Article

49 paragraphs (1), Section 80, Section 91, and Section 92 of the paragraph (1), paragraph (2) and paragraph (3)

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

35 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Act No. 7 of 2004 on Water Resources not

has a binding legal force;

5. Order the loading of this ruling in the News of the Republic of Indonesia as per provision

applicable laws.

Or if the Court of Judges on the Constitutional Court has a decision

another, please the verdict be fair (ex aequo et bono).

[2.2] weighed that in order to prove its control, the applicant

has submitted a letter/writing tool given the proofs of P-1 until

with the P-15 proof, as follows:

1. Proof P-1: Photocopy Law Number 7 of the Year 2004 on Source

Power Water;

2. Evidence P-2: Photocopied KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of M. Sirajuddin Syamsuddin;

3. Proof P-3: Photocopy KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of H.A. Aris Banadji;

4. Proof P-4: Photocopied KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of Lieus Sungkharisma;

5. Proof P-5: Photocopy KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of Gembong Tawangalun;

6. Proof P-6: Photocopy KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of H. Amidhan;

7. Proof P-7: Photocopy KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of Adhyaksa Dault;

8. Evidence P-8: Photocopy KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of Marwan Batubara;

9. Proof P-9: Photocopy KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of Laode Ida;

10. Evidence P-10: Photocopy KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of M. Hatta Taliwang;

11. Evidence P-11: Photocopied KTP Pemapplicant on behalf of Rachmawati Sukarno Putri;

12. Evidence P-12: Photocopy of the Decree of the Minister of Law and Human Rights Number AHU-

88.AH.01.07 Year 2010 on the Basic Budget Changes

Muhammadiyah Requirements of Muhammadiyah;

13. Evidence P-13: Photocopy AD/ART Al Jami'yatul Washliyah;

14. Evidence P-14: Photocopy Akta Notary Arman Lany No. 4 dated 11 June 2013

regarding the establishment of the Vanaprastha sorority ..

15. Evidence P-15: Photocopy of Government Regulation No. 16 of 2005 on

The development of the Drinking Water System.

In addition, the petitioners also submitted 7 (seven) experts listened to

his interest on December 18 2013, January 15, 2014, and January 29

2014, at the point of the following:

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

36 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

1. Prof. Dr. Suteki, S.H., M.H. A person in the management field of SDA, Pancasila can be a political foundation

laws of state control over the SDA to be directed for management

The SDA does not oppress those who are socially weak and economic

(poor population).

The population for poor residents especially living in urban water is

a luxury item and a rarity. More than one-third of the population's income

is poor earmarked to meet water needs as a result of

clean water channels in their dwellers.

The water availability remains while the need for water is increasing

The quantity and the quality, so it gives rise to scarcity. On stage

water scarcity, justice principle becomes essential in the management of water.

The justice of justice to get water as human rights cannot be submitted

to each individual based on the market mechanism, but rather there should be

Government interference to guarantee the fulfilment of water rights.

The government needs to form the social structure of the water provision economy

so it does not fall in the hands of individuals or the liberal market mechanism.

The water Privatisation of the water conflicting with the SDA management principle of value

social justice.

In Decree Number 058-059-060-063/PUU-II/2004 and No. 008 /PUU-

III/2005 MK argued that the Water Resources Act has granted

the obligation to the Government to respect, protect, and

fulfill the rights to the water, so in its implementation rules

The government should pay attention to the legal considerations of the ruling.

The MK argued that the Water Resources Act set things

that are subject to the management of the SDA. Although the Source Act

Water Power opens up private role opportunities for rights to be entitled

water efforts and water power enterprise permits, but that should not be

resulting in the water company will fall into private hands.

A 2005 16-year-old PPT on the Development of the Water Supply System

Drinking (SPAM) has opened up the chance of hosting water

drinking by private without restriction on the overall stage of activities.

When, the MK Putermination in testing the Water Resources Act

A copy of this ruling is not for and It cannot be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

37 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

states that the state is responsible for meeting the needs

community base over water.

MK MK also argued that the responsibility of the provision of drinking water

is organized by the government through BUMD, BUMN, and not by

private. Roles and cooperatives, private enterprise entities, and society

are limited in case the government has not been able to host

alone, and the government remains likely to exercise its authority

in setting up, execution, as well as the SDA management business

Overall.

The MK confirms that PDAM must be really cultivated by

local government as SDA maintainer. The good-bad performance of PDAM

to provide drinking water to the public reflects well-

the country's bad in fulfilling its water rights.

The PP is the development of the Drinking Water Management System is contrary to

Retrial of MK's Putermination Law.

paragraph 64 clause (1) PP Number 16 Year 2005 on Development of SPAM

mentions private engagement in hosting drinking water at

territories that have not been serviced by BUMD and BUMN, can be performed at

all Staging stage. Thus the responsibility

the country mandated by UUD 1945 may be replaced by a private body

that is oriented for profit.

The private engagement can also be done in the area that it has

BUMN or BUMD. the host of drinking water, in terms of BUMN or BUMD

it cannot improve the quality and quantity of service in

its service area. This is a form of privatization.

The SPAM Development PP does not restrict private capital ownership,

let alone are foreign.

Perpres Perpres Number 77/2007 on Closed Business Fields List and

Open updated with Press No. 111/2007 and Perpres Number

36/2010, which in the second attachment of the pres is mentioned, "Details

of the business fields open to foreign investment with

capital ownership varying from 25% to 95%." One

area of the venture is a drinking water company whose ownership

its capital can be controlled by 95% by foreigners.

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

38 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Downloaded from page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Above the base of what pegged down 95% if the water production branch was drinking was

important to the state and master of the lives of many people?

An estimated capital of 95% of capital shows a privatization agenda

drinking water in this Perpres and in the Water Resources Act.

Based on that, PP Development SPAM, Home Affairs Number

23/2006, and Perpres Updated 77/2007 with Perpres

Number 111/2007 and Perpres Number 36/2010, will be hit conditionally

constitutional warning of MK.

Privatization is always followed by a rate hike but not always followed

increasing quality and quantity of service.

The release of 2025 is predicted to be water pacecics in the world that can trigger

the onset of war water.

The era of privatization is no longer a 21st-century trend. The current era is more suitable for

dongled economic growth.

The growth of the early 1980s to 1990s the role of the state was restricted and castrated

with the program of privatization and deregulation, but the promises of liberalization

The explanation of Article 33 of the Constitution of 1945 prior to the amendment states that

The economy is based on economic democracy, prosperity for all

people. Because of this, the production branches that are important to the country and

who control the lives of many people must be ruled by the state. If

the production fell into the hands of a powerful person, then

the people would be much oppressed. Only companies that do n' t master

hajat lives a lot can be in the hands of a person. Earth and water and

The wealth of nature contained within the earth is the staple

the prosperity of the people. Therefore, it must be controlled by the state and

to be used for the great prosperity of the people.

The man Hatta interprets Article 33 of the paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution that it is meant

by the state controlled by the state in terms of the same name. It has rights

by the state, not by the Government, to control

the hosting of the production branches concerned. With

the production branches are important for the country and which

controls the lives of many people by the state, meaning the state has

the right to control the holding of production branches

Copts this verdict is not for and cannot be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

39 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

. The event can be directly submitted to

BUMN acting agencies and the private companies that are in charge

answer to the government whose work is controlled by the state.

The PAM Jaya line has a profit very high-oriented

for private companies that are profit-oriented, if there is no

advantage or not to make profit, the region will not be dialled.

Then the society is unturned. by the drinking water channel will

pay higher compared to the community in region that

there is a stream of drinking water. So that community income is mostly

spent on buying clean water the daily needs.

Juwiring County, Klaten, usually gets the flow of water from Ponggok, but

the farmer there instead irrigates his soil by sucking the groundwater with

the diesel engine. It is ironic that the farmer is in a place where the water is abundant,

but instead siphoning water from the soil using diesel.

The water company's organizer should be the government with

the purpose of meeting the needs public, as private-party organizers

definitely priorite benefits (profit oriented).

The Air Power Resources Act demands 49 Government Regulations that must

be set up.

There are two PP, which are PP about Irrigation and the PP Water Management System

Drinking.

This bill has already been tested by the Court with the constitutional amar

conditional, thus it should be this second test stay

proving whether the government is correct in giving interpretation.

The Government of the Government turns out to be Interpret the other by issuing PP 16/2005

and PP Irigation, Permendagri 23/2006, Perpres 77/2007, and Perpres

36/2010.

The action is not possible if MK performs rule breaking to test the PP

SPAM (Drinking Water Management System) because it is related to testing

returns. Except without any retesting, then the authority

testing of legislation under the Act

is the MA ' s authority.

The provisions of Article 7, Article 8, Article 9, Article 45, Article 46, Article 47, Article 47, and Article 49

contradictory to the 1945 Constitution especially Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

40 COPIES OF THE Constitutional Court ' S RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The provisions of Article 7 and Article 8 of the Water Resources Act introduce the right to water that

covers the right to use water and water for the use of water. The introduction of the right

thus can be interpreted that at a time the water resource

can be tied up with certain rights such as resources or objects at

generally. Of course this is contrary to Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.

The article 9 section states that the rights to water efforts may be provided to

the individual or the business entity with the permission of the government or

the local government is in compliance with its authority. This section is called

as the section that opens the commercialization door of water and the privatization of water,

and is therefore contrary to Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.

Article 26 of the paragraph (1) states that the assistance of water resources

is done by prioring social functions to realize justice

by noticing the principle of water utilization by paying the cost

services water resource management by engaging the public role.

In this provision there is also a commercial commercial aspect of water.

The article 38 of the paragraph (2) mentions that the business entity and the individual

can carry out the cloud utilization with weather modification technology

after obtaining permission from the government. Whether or not the government has been

giving permits then artificial rain can be done by private. If still

happens wrong rain, who is the responsible party?

Maintaining water management should be integrated. Water resource issues

do n' t just be a PU affair.

2. Prof. Dr. Absori, S.H., M.H.

The 7/2004 legislation on Water Resources since being discussed in the House as a bill

has been disputed by many parties. Many of the parties want

The Government and the House of Representatives are subject to the discussion of the Natural Resources bill

Nature, but which appears to be the Water Resources Act.

The majority of the thoughts offered:

i) need to be considered aspects of the bill. support ecosystem and protection

natural resources. (ii) there are concrete policy steps in

order to realize public justice in accessing the source

nature.

ii) reconstruction and consolidation of natural resource management agencies

in order to become more sturdy and integrated.

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

41 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

iii) compiled a five-year development program in the field of resources

nature that responds to real problems in society.

The imposition of the mandate of Pancasila law is the management policy

the natural resources that hold on to: i) state responsibility

as a natural resource power holder; ii) strengthen the rights

society as a real state sovereign.

THE TAP OF MPR NUMBER IX of 2001 mandated the President to

convening of Agrarian Law and Natural Resources Management.

THE 2002 TAP MPR NUMBER VI contains a recommendation to the President for

setting up the drafting of the governing laws

the natural resources.

RECENT TAP MPR NUMBER V 2003 recommends some advice for

resolving existing natural resource problems and conflicts

in it.

The Government's failure failed to change the renewal of the resource law

nature, instead it was the 7/2004 Act of the Resource Governing.

Water. It thus raises the question of what is behind it.

The passage of Article 6 of the paragraph (1) of the SDA bill refers to it, "The water resources are controlled by the state

and used for the greater prosperity of the people." The meaning

is thus provided in Article 33 of the paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, but the interpretation that

appears to be variegated so that it is multifaciable.

The value should be any action in the field of SDA should allow

its captaposition:

1. The government was able to protect the entire nation

and all of Indonesia's blood.

2. It can improve the general welfare, raise the level of life

and the intellect of the nation, as well as carry out the world order

based on perpetual peace and social justice.

The SDA bill commits a waiver of the rights of the ulayat. Legal society

custom. Article 6 of the paragraph (2) of the SDA Act governing the right of the ulayat but

is actually more appropriate if it refers to Article 5 of the 5/1960 Act on

The Basic Law of the Agrarian Poes that regulates the issue of the earth, water,

The natural wealth is contained in the It's inside, even space. Its meaning

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

42 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

is the customary law should be the basis or principle in determining

the laws relating to the SDA.

The Quran says that water is a symbol of justice, a symbol

life, and a symbol of prosperity, it is important that it is emphasized

in Law 7/2004.

The paragraph 6 of the paragraph (3) of the SDA Act mentions, " The right ulayat of the legal society

the custom of the water resources as referred to in paragraph (2) remains

is recognized as long as there is still and has been established with

the rule of law. the local area. " This suggests irregularyness

thinking. The rights of the ulayat and customary law were either delegated or specified

with regional regulations instead of reducing or reducing the meaning

the customary law itself. Many customary or civil law values

that cannot be established with regional regulations.

The privatisation of water resource management can be seen in Article 9 of the paragraph (1)

about the right to use water. to an individual or

a body of business with both the government and local governments. Article

this is contrary to Article 33 of the paragraph (2). In fact the government can

strengthen in the institutional form both BUMN and

BUMD, so that the state has a dominant role.

The relative is about the potential for horizontal conflict, Article 48 of the paragraph (1) governs there is priority

or The monopoly in the distribution of water priorites areas

upstream. This is the case in which there is a lot of problems.

For example, water resource conflicts in the Losari region, Brebes, and

Cirebon, due to the construction of a levee in the Crucut River region

causes the water to flow into the Losari area, Brebes, to be

dwindled. And so the tambak farmers who were in the area were experiencing

losses.

Conflicts also occur on the border between East Java and Central Java,

that is in Tawangmangu, Karanganyar, where there is a Ondo-Ondo spring.

The river is dialled into the Magetan region because Magetan granted

compensation to the Central Java and Pemda Karanganyar.

As a result the local farmers were harmed and demanded that the distribution of the water

come first. Those in need without having to exist

base precede compensation.

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

43 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The passage of Article 91 paragraph (1) Act 7/2004 shows the government's dominant role

in the settlement of the dispute. This is contrary to Article 89

Act 32/2009 which in order to resolve environmental disputes is not

only involving the Government but also the public. Article 92 paragraph (1)

also states in the resolution of an environmental dispute there is a right

defendant of the organization's institutions that are breeding water issues. The provision

is thus the adoption of the previously regulated 32/2009 Act

in the 23/1997 Act and the 4/1982 Act governing environmental problems

life.

The parties that can submit the rights to the lawsuit against the issues

environment and water are restricted to only the organization moving in

the field of water problems. Similarly in environmental issues only

organizations are moving in the field of environmental issues that have

the rights of the lawsuit. So that the various stakeholders and the concerned institutions

in the field of water and the field of the environment have no legal rights

against the practice of branching and environmental damage.

The age of the Environment Act is twenty. more years, the rights of sue or

legal standing this cannot go well because it is experiencing

difficulties in the event process.

The environment is thus the practice of this environmental dispute being discriminatory,

because limiting certain people moving in the field of water.

The water resource ' s appeal actually may be used but for purposes-

public interest or achieving maslahat.

The principle of basic principles of resource management, including water, must be equal

and a basic and purpose struggle for the people Indonesia

as formulated in the opening of the 1945 Constitution. Thus

the government should be able to protect all the nation and the entire spill

Indonesian blood and can seaed the public, including

increasing the life tarf and intelligence of the nation's life.

The link in relation with licensing, P may give permission because

the government has power. However, the permission granted should be selective

because according to Article 33 of the paragraph (2) the 1945 Constitution-branches of production that

is important for the country and master of the life of many people must be

controlled by the state. Its meaning is that both BUMN and BUMD

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

44 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

must be dominant. In case there is a shorer in the form of work

same, then the government must be dominant.

The grant of granting of the time, whether given to the agency

individual and business entity, more procedural and formal,

while a weak field surveillance resulting in the exploitation

the natural resources are out of control.

The local conflicts such as the Cokro Tulung waterhole, Central Java,

are repelled by recruiting pro locals. company,

while non-pro corporate enterprises are given a pragmatic offer,

so the conflict can be temporarily repressed, but a moment will

explode.

Last few minutes occurred new issues, as the company was only

oriented towards profit, so the road body traversed by the tool

The water carrier is badly damaged.

The water carrier has management natural, that is at the time the rain is absorbed by

the trees and the soil, then at the dry time removed in

slowly so sustained. This natural management is no longer

occurs because the river water is depleted by the time of the rainy season

or a certain time taken by individual companies

and private, so at the dry time they must be issued

A lot of extra money for having to suck the groundwater.

The release is vulgar the privatization of water to private agencies on the grounds

"the country cannot afford," when in fact the state is capable.

The current version of the country is not capable of.

The consumptive society actually cannot be released

from the country ' s design.

The ones in the area that the water is clean and clear, before there's industrialization like

now, people never get hurt by peeing rocks and

so on. But there is tremendous water marketing, with

the public hygienic pretext no longer wants to consume the usual water

consumed.

3. Dr. Dea Erwin Ramedhan The water drinking in packaging is already stirring up turmoil in the area.

For example in Pandarchopped, Banten, there was a disagreement between

local society, multinational corporations, and state administration.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

45 COPIES OF THE Constitutional Court ' S RULING Downloaded from page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

An installation was vandalized and burned by the local population due to administration

the state did not pay attention to the procedure (consultation) with the community) and

not doing Amdal studies in the construction of a water factory.

The establishment of a dispersal or anointing of water without oversight by

the administration of the state or by any other party. No one knows

how much water will be taken and how much in a water vacuum.

The rules of the Regulation also do not explain what is taken is water

surface or artesian water.

The effect of such things has a result of It's an emergency. Farmers in Klaten

now have to take/suck up water with diesel engines, whereas

previously did not. In Sukabumi once water can be taken at depths of 5

up to 8 meters, it must now be more than 15 meters.

The facts are so the backdrop of local community protests,

including the farmers who need water for life. daily or

for its own farm.

The water company there was a water company in the 2000s taking water at less than 2.5

billion liters, then the 2010s took 5.6 billion liters of water. However

is curious as the company's earnings are not increasing.

It does raise questions regarding the reporting of the sealing

water.

The water-fetters picked per one litre are priced at some rupiah, but are sold

Rp. 3,000,-to the Indonesian population. The packaging of the bottled water industry

is larger than any industry.

The water market in the packaging consumed Indonesian maasIndonesian for at least

60% was purchased from a foreign company, thus giving a profit without

the limit to A foreign party did not give a profit which means

to the Indonesian side.

The tax on taxation arises the question of why the tax magnate is just

like that, are you related to the presence of foreign parties in the management of water

Indonesia.

The water-sealing process in Padarchopped, Banten, is estimated to be 63 litres per

the second will produce Rp.16 billion per day. From this estimate can

imagine earning one multinational company for in Indonesia

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

46 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

per year. While the income of local farmers per harvest is more or less

Rp.12 billion.

The retrieval of the shooting thus also means possession of territory by the party

foreign, so that the farmer cannot enter his own mind which

already released for foreign interests.

The Aqua Danone is controlling about 50% to 60% of the national market.

Originally one stock of Aqua Golden Mississippi is worth Rp.1,000,-

next up to 2010 is valuable between Rp.100,000,-up to

Rp.200,000,-even Rp.250,000,-.

of the 2010 Aqua Golden Mississippi did a delisting, which

probably why there were two, that i) did not need any more money

the public, or ii) did not want to do transparency. The Tbk company is mandatory

each year gives a profit report.

It was announced in 2001 a 2.3 billion litre water production with gross profit or gross profit

Rp.99 billion.

The average volume of 3 billion liters of water production with gross profit. Rp.134 billion.

It was announced in 2003 water production of 3.1 billion liters with the profit of broto Rp.107, 28 billion.

It was announced in 2004 a water production of 3.18 billion litres with gross profit of Rp.141, 95 billion.

There's a gross profit report.

It was announced in 2006 the 4.9 billion litre water production with the gross profit of Rp.71 billion.

In 2007 water production was 5.17 billion liters with gross profit of Rp.89, 7 billion.

The forecast of 2008 water production of nearly 6 billion liters with gross profit was only Rp.95

billion. As the rise in water production increased rapidly, the gross profit

declined. The expert has once told the Directorate of Tax

but there are no answers.

The articles relating to the management of the water resources are clear

contrary to Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.

4. Dr. Aidul Fitriciada Azhary, S.H., M.H. What the UUD is referring to as the basis for test-

invite not only refers to the norm or rules contained

in the Constitution, but also refers to the ideal values and principles. which

is contained in the teachings of constitutionalism, namely values and principles

restrictions on power in the holding of state government.

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral Or evidence. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

47 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The point is the limitation of governmental power on a party and

the protection of the rights of citizens on the other side.

The 1945 Constitution of the Constitution has since adopted the values of constitutionalism

That is, but not the value of liberal constitutionalism but the value of

social justice-oriented constitutionalism.

The liberal constitutionality of liberal constitutionalism prefers the protection of rights and

the freedom of the individual who is the most important. Implications for the maximum limitation

may be the power of the government. The constitutionalism of liberalism

is a reflection of economic liberalism that desires the expiring

free market economic system in parallel with the liberal political system.

The Constitution of the Constitution of 1945 has since the beginning rejected the constitutionalism of the constitution. liberal because

proved since enforced by the Dutch East Indies Government

based on Regeringsreglement of 1840 has led to

the suppression of wealth and oppression of the Indonesian Nation. The principle

in the Constitution of the Dutch East Indies, the government must be developed

as a private capital or partite protective tool, including also capital

foreign private.

Based on Regeringsreglement of 1848 system the liberal economy

is thus run in parallel with the parliamentary democracy system

which allows private capital powers to impact

the process of forming the Act so that it can be in line with

Their interests.

The Constitution of the Constitution of 1945 rejects the doctrine of constitutionalism. liberal, and

choosing to form a national political and economic system based on

social justice.

The article 33 of the Constitution of 1945 wishes the economic planning to be

collective based on the principle of familial or social solidarity [paragraph (1)];

the presence of state control over the production branches that

is important for the country and mastering the lives of the many [verse (2)];

and state control of the natural resources [verse (3)].

The above above economic structure is shaped as a capable political structure that

embodied a welfare goal.

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

48 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The importance of the norm Article 33 of the Constitution of 1945 is seen from the agreement of the

leaders of the nation to maintain the provisions of Article 33 UUD 1945

at the time of the change to UUDS 1950.

The Bill of the Agreement changes the 1945 Constitution to UUDS 1950 stated,

" The Basic Law While the Year 1950 was acquired by

changed the constitution of the Republic of Indonesia contained in

it esensialia The Basic Law of 1945 is added to

other parts of the constitution of the United States of Indonesia. " Esensilia

UUD 1945 includes three chapters, namely Article 27, Article 29, and Article 33 of the Constitution

1945.

re-upper-base, testing some provisions in the Act 7/2004

on Water Resources must also be based on Article 27 and Article

33 UUD 1945 as the esensialia of the 1945 Constitution.

The dissection of MK Number 58-59-60-63/PUU-II/2004 and the Decree of MK Number

08 /PUU-III/2005 mentioned at least two principal principles, i)

hosting of the drinking water supply system in

the principle is a responsibility answer the Government and local governments; and

ii) the government must prioritde the fulfilment of water rights

compared to other interests because water rights are rights

the main one.

The article 11 and Article 12 International Covenant on Economic Social and

Cultural Rights (ICESCR). Paragraph three of the general comment on the provisions

Article 11 mentions that a specific recognition of the rights of each

the person over the standard of decent life, including food, sandang, and

housing, must be interpreted as being in the It is entitled to water rights as

a right to a decent standard of life, especially as one

The most fundamental conditions for survival.

The water rights measure is also related to the provisions of Article 12 that recognize the right

any person to enjoy the high standards achieved against

health. On the basis of such law, the right to the water is essentially

is the right of every person to obtain water with enough, safe,

acceptable, and physically accessible, and affordable for

personal use and home. steps.

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

49 COPIES OF THE Constitutional Court ' S RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Normatively the right to water rights contains meaning on one party as "the

right to maintain access to existing water supplies necessary for the right to

water and the right to be free from interference, such as the right to be free

from arbitrary disconnections or contamination of water supplies", and on the other

other side" is the right to a system of water supply and management that

provides equality of opportunity for people to enjoy the right to water.

Meaning, on one side each person should be able to access the water with

easy, whereas on the other side must provide the same opportunity

for each person to enjoy the rights to the water. In principle, water,

facilities, and water services must be accessible to any person without

discrimination.

The article 11 and Article 12 Covenant Ecosoc is actually set in

Article 27 of the paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution which determines that each citizen

country is entitled to a job and a livelihood that is worthy of

Humanity.

The guarantee of water's right of water is strengthened institutional with the right

control of the state governed Article 33 of the paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution.

The link in relation to Article 27 of the 1945 Constitution, the water resource cannot

is defined solely as an economic commodity, but more fundamentally

as one of the fundamental human rights for

maintaining live.

The rights to the right of control of the state over the water resources should be understood also in

the context of Article 28I paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution which states that

protection, submission, enforcement and fulfillment of human rights

is country's responsibility, especially the government.

Conceptually, the responsibility of the state satisfy the rights to the related water

with the right to water rights as part of the rights of the Ekosok (rights

economy, social, and culture) rooted in the concept of freedom

positive that desires a broad and effective spectrum. for

the country for intervening in fulfilling its eco-smartass rights. The rights

is thus distinct from its rooted civil and political rights character

on the concept of negative freedom, which is not intended to be

the country's interference in the fulfillment of its rights.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

50 COPIES OF THE Constitutional Court ' S RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The link in relation to water rights, state responsibility must be defined

as a widely and effective mastery of the resource management

water to ensure everyone can meet the needs of the water

reasonably, safe, and affordable for personal use and home

the ladder.

The provisions of Article 40 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the Water Resources Act

declare the development of a drinking water supply system to

government and local government responsibilities, and

The organizers are executed by the The BUMN and/or BUMD already

in line with Article 27 and Article 33 of the paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution.

the following shall be, but Section 40 paragraph (4) of the Water Resource Act governing

cooperatives, private enterprise entities, or community groups

contains norms that are not fully in line with Article 27 and

Article 33 verse (3) UUD 1945. Norms involving corporations or

institutions other than BUMN and/or BUMD indicate the paradigm that

water resources solely as an economic commodity that can

be redirected to private parties. oriented to

economic profit. Whereas drinking water is the most

fundamental, that is part of the right to water that is guaranteed by the state.

The supply of drinking water is not solely with regard to the purpose of

prosperity in the economic sense, but with regard to the conditions

fundamental that determines the dignity of humanity, the right of life, and

health quality.

Privatisation of the right to water will open the opportunity towards the occurrence of

discrimination in accessing the needs over the water.

Privatization is going to encourage some people can get a drinking water

which is quality, while most others are difficult to

access and reach out properly.

The provisional provisional founders of the state formed Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution to

change and abolish the economic system Inherited liberal

Colonial system of the Dutch East Indies.

One of the Watak of the Hindia-Dutch Colonial liberalism is the role of

private or particulate dominant in the management of natural resources,

while the country only be a private capital protective tool.

A copy of this verdict is not for and cannot used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

51 COPIES OF THE Constitutional Court ' S RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The exercise of the implementation of the rights of ecopretenders intends to be a major responsibility

of the government, in contrast to civil rights and politics.

The inside of the General Comments mentioned that the use of interest

private and household should be given the authority or power

that is great to the state to ensure that it is not only

fulfillment of economic needs, but the need for the dignity of life

humans.

Fulfillment Fulfillment for water rights, in the sense personal and domestic

uses, the principle is without discrimination.

The constitutional Test is not solely referring to the norm or

rules, but rather refers to the principle of constitutionalism.

The modern Constitution has three meanings, which is i) as the supreme rule;

ii) the existing system of government or the system of government that

does indeed apply; and iii) the It's the right of constitutionalism.

Many countries have a constitution but are not adherent to

constitutionalism.

The governments of communist states and authoritarian states have a constitution that

is long but not constitutionalism.

The UK does not have a written constitution but adheres to constitutionalism.

Inside the Inside. Water rights context, the first principle is how

the state can protect the interests of water rights, which is in the interest

the public to acquire water for the sake of personal use and

domestic or family. The second principle is for the sake of the right to

maintain life; and the third principle is health.

The constitution of the Indonesian Constitutionalism is not a liberal constitutional that gives

great authority to individuals, but rather social constitutionalism

that emphasizes the balance between political justice and justice

social.

5. Dr. Hamid Chalid, S.H., LL.M. The existence of an earlier MK of water was categorized as public good, which

is a typical object that is the source of life so that access

against it is a human right.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

60 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING are downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The IMF stated specifically that it concerns water to be assigned

to World Bank to move further through project management

the water resources, which are signed on April 1998 to push

the commercialization and privatization of water in Indonesia.

The commercialization and privatization of the water was poured in the Act 7/2004

which is part of the implementation of the US$ 150 million loan from the Bank

The world as a requirement of a total loan total of US$ 300

million for a water restructuring program.

The ADB's which is an ally of the IMF and World Bank is moving further

by financing 21 water projects in Indonesia in privatization and

commercialization.

The most extensive impact activities were technical assistance projects worth

US$ 600,000 in

in February 2001, in which ADB ran a wide variety of programs

relating to the water sector and water infrastructure in Indonesia.

in the February 2004 World Bank report, before the passage of the Act of 7/2004

on 18 March 2004, entitled "Water Resources Management During

Transition and Reform in Indonesia Toward an Integrated Perspective on

Agriculture Drainage"with subtheme" Water Sector Reform Beyond 1998 "

states some of the ideas that are the basis of the draft" National Water

Resources Policy Action Plan" in 1994 until 2020, that

policies will identify to emphasize the allocation of water that

efficient, efficient utilization, safe water quality, alignment

economically, and capital budget management, role improvement

private sector, and community participation, as well as structure needs

water administration consistent with a unified goal.

s action Plan stressed on DAS management approach that

recommends the establishment national water resource council.

The World Bank Report ' s exit in February 2004, while the Board

The new National Water Resources was passed in 2008, indicating the role

World Bank very significant in the whole management of the management

of water resources in Indonesia.

The water management strategy in the 7/2004 Act appears to be clearly intended

facilitating the business sector. It is thus visible from the three key words that

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

61 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

tend to show commercialization and privatization efforts, i.e. i)

water management; ii) private and community engagement; And iii) the rights to

water.

The space scope of the water business referred to in the Act 7/2004 is very broad,

includes almost all potential water resources mentioned in

Article 2. In terms of water resource management, Government

carry out Article 6 and Article 13 of the Law of 7/2004.

With water rights, private resources can manage water resources for

commercial interests and can be sold at a

level

economy price.

The existence of Act 7/2004 was strengthened in Act 25/2007. Planting

Capital which sets out a wide range of property rights in

form of rights to efforts, building rights, and usage rights, which is equal

with water rights.

The capital Planting Bill also provides the basis the designation of a sector that

is closed and open for foreign capital cultivation.

The Spirit of Law 7/2004 is equal to or strengthened by the Planting Legislation

Capital, which is the commercialization of Indonesia's natural wealth through the cultivation of

capital.

The bill by referring to the Capital Cultivation Act, the government issued

the regulations regarding the negative list of investments or a list of business fields that

is closed and open for capital planting. In the negative list

investment, namely Perpres 36/2010, the Government determined that

drinking water company can be controlled by up to 95% by capital planting

foreign, and agricultural businesses that have a close connection to water

up to 95% can be controlled by foreign capital cultivation.

The high rise of urbanization into urban and population development that

is uncontrollable in reverse with the availability of water, which

further becomes the source of the crisis in urban.

Indonesia ' s population has a wealth of abundant water, but new utilized

about 25% of the provision of raw water, irrigation water, as well as home needs

stairs, urban, and industrial. Of the 7.2 million hectares of new irrigation land

is served about 11%.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

62 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Low-income Farmers ' resources are getting poorer, one

cause is high agricultural production costs due to damage

watering infrastructure, high production means cost, as well as The magnitude of the risk

agriculture due to natural disasters, drought, and climate change.

The 7/2004 bill did not provide a resolution of the water crisis that occurred in

Indonesia, but instead aggravated the crisis rate and expanded

A conflict of water resources in the midst of society. Not

rarely also gives rise to open conflict between public and private.

The needs of all water resources are absolutely in the hands

country, and the country is building a production branch to manage water

as the constitution's mandate. While private would

use water for various economic activities they would have to buy

water to the country through a state company.

The private sector should not be mastered or have any water resources because

severely endangering the general interest.

The spirit of the spirit of community engagement and water management through granting

the right to attempt is a form of constitutional violation.

[2.3] A draw that against the request of the applicant, President

relayed the description in the December 4, 2013 trial and

has delivered a written statement dated 17 December 2013 which

received the Court of Justice on December 23, 2013, at its point

stated the following as described below.

The authority of the Constitutional Court At the core the applicant postulate there has been a swastanization

veiled due to the Government in the formation of Government Regulation No.

16 Year 2005 on Development of the Drinking Water Supply System

in accordance with interpretation of the Constitutional Court Decree Number 058-059-060-

063 /PUU-II/2004 and Number 008 /PUU-III/2005 dated 19 July 2005. Thus

results in the a quo Act may be retesting in

the Constitutional Court. In addition to these applicants in its application

using the Act as a test stone of Government Regulation No.

15 Year 2005 on Development of the Drinking Water Supply System.

Against it according to The government concerned by the

the applicant is regarding the application or implementation of the provisions-

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

63 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

provisions in the SDA Act, while the controls are used

same or copy-paste with the preceding application, so that the presumption

The applicant declares the Regulation. Government Number 16 Year 2005

contrary to the interpretation of the Constitutional Court is unwarranted.

Based on that reason above according to the Government of the request of the para

The applicant is not appropriate because it is duly duly duly stated. if the Constitutional Court

states that the a quo is not be the authority of the Court

Constitution.

On Legal Occupation (Legal Standing) The description of legal position (legal standing) the applicant will

be described in more detail in the complete Government Description which will

be delivered on the next trial or through the Supreme Court of the Court

The Constitution. However, the Government pleads to the Constitutional Court

to consider and assess whether the applicant has a position

legal (legal standing) or not, as determined by Article 51

paragraph (1) Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court

as amended by Act No. 8 of 2011,

and by the previous Constitutional Court of Justice since the termination

No. 06 /PUU-III/2005 and Verdict Number 11 /PUU-V/2007.

The Government ' s Description Of The Request Material Is Moted To Be tested

Before the Government provides an explanation of the material that

is being honed to be tested by the petitioners can be explained things as

below:

1. That of all the applicant's application descriptions both posita and

the dots have similar intent and purpose with Perpleas

testing as set forth in case Number 058-059-060-

063 /PUU-II/2004 and Number 008 /PUU-III/2005 which had been severed by

Constitutional Court on 19 July 2005. Accordingly,

The government requests the applicant in case Number 85 /PUU-

XI/2013 today as if it had a different intent and purpose.

There are similarities.

2. That because of the wishes of the earlier applicants with a plea when

this has a common sense of intent and purpose. Then the Government's description

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

64 COPIES OF THE Constitutional Court ' S COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

has been delivered in earlier testing as a mutatis

mutandis with the caption the government that will be delivered on

the Pleno trial of the day is December 4, 2013.

3. That the Government's information to be delivered in the trial

is currently considered to be a description of the same value,

refine, affirm, or add to supplement

the government captions Past.

Following the Government's explanation of the charge material

please be the following:

a. Background

Basic Conception of the SDA Act may be detailed as follows:

The opening of the 1945 Constitution confirms that the purpose of the establishment of the government

The State of Indonesia is to protect the entire Indonesian nation and

all of Indonesia's blood spills and to advance general welfare,

refine the life of the nation, and carry out the world order

which is based on independence, eternal peace, and social justice.

Next Article 33 paragraph (3) of the Basic Law of 1945 states that

the earth and water and wealth The nature contained within it is controlled by

the state and used for the great prosperity of the people.

Therefore the entire natural wealth is both in and at

above the earth's surface, it is mandatory. utilized as large as

the well-being and prosperity of the people including water.

The availability of current water in various regions of Indonesia is already increasingly

limited. The need for water continues to rise so much

imbalances between availability and water needs, for that source

the power of the water is mandatory to remain sustainable in order to continue.

For management Water resources can be well executed for

anticipating the problem above the required legal instrument is required

which is the cornerstone for the management of water resources. Also

developing demands in society for:

a. there is a more tangible recognition of human rights over water

related to human rights.

b. there is protection against the interests of the people's farm and society

The economy is weak.

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

65 COPIES OF THE Constitutional Court ' S RULING WERE DOWNLOADED FROM THE PAGE: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

c. Process of decision making and policy setting is more

transparent and democratic.

d. There are legal signs in anticipation of the expansion of the value of value

The growing economy of the water.

The development of the problem as well as the demands of these societies has been

generating new paradigms in source management. water power that is between

another is:

a. First, complete and integrated management.

b. protection against the basic human rights of the water.

c. the balance between atonement with conservation.

d. The balance between the handlers is physically non-physical.

e. Interested party involvement in resource management

water in a democratic spirit and coordination approach.

f. adopt sustainable development principles based on

alignment between social functions, living environment, and economics.

On the way with those things above, then the Power Resources Act

The water has the capability to ensure that water resource management

includes the efforts to plan, execute, monitor, and evaluate

the holding of water resource conservation. Resource assistance

water and water damage control are carried out in accordance with the mandate of the Invite-

Invite Basic 1945. It has also been in line with the opinion of the Court

Constitution in Decree Number 058-059-060-063/PUU-II/2004 and Numbers

008 /PUU-III/2005 dated 19 July 2005, which stated that " state position

in conjunction with Its obligations that are inflicted by human rights

humans, states should respect (to respect), protect (to protect), and

fulfill it (to fulfill) ". In order to realize the values of respect,

protection, and fulfillment of human rights over water,

The SDA Act has three basic thoughts, philosophically,

sociologists, and yuridis as follows.

The philosophically water is the gift of the Almighty God who becomes

the source of life and the source of livelihood. Accordingly, the country is required

providing protection and assurance of any person's basic right to

obtain water as a fulfillment of the daily minimum needs

to meet the healthy, clean, and healthy life of life. productive.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

66 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

Sociologically, the management of my source of water should pay attention to the function

social, accommodating the spirit of democratization, decentralization, openness

in the public order of life, nation, and country, and

recognize the civil rights of the customary law.

judicially Article 33 of the paragraph (3) of the Basic Law of 1945 stated

that the earth, and the water, and the natural wealth contained therein

is ruled by country and be used for great prosperity

the people. In line with that provision, the SDA Act stated

that "Water resources are controlled by the state and used to

the great prosperity of the people". The definition of "state-controlled" is

including the definition of regulating and/or organizing, fostering and

supervising, especially for improving and improving services,

so that the water resources can be equitable. and sustained.

Similarly hosting water resource management need

pay attention to some basic technical thinking according to the natural nature of the water,

that is:

1. Water is the renewables that its ability

is subject to the natural cycle called the hydrological cycle. At the time-

when certain water abounds is even very excessive, and there is also the moment

drought so that there needs to be an allotedness between abundant water and

drought.

2. Water naturally amounts to a fixed amount, but its ability in each

places vary, according to the local natural conditions. There is a region-

a region naturally rich in water and there is also a water shortage region,

so it is necessary that human intervention to bring water from

the abundant region of its water to a rare place of water through

Water resource management.

3. The availability of surface water and groundwater affected one the same

another. Therefore, the management of both needs to be commissed.

4. Water is a source of flowing resources (flowing resources)

dynamically without knowing the limits of the administration area of government and

the country. Thus the basis of its management region must be based on

the hydrological region with regard to the existence of the region

administrative. Because of the formulation of policy, pattern, and plan

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as an official reference or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

67 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

The management of water resources needs to involve parties in the regions

related administrative to be achieved agreement and interest in

applicability.

Based on the thinking above then the water resources as

are set in the SDA Act needs to be managed according to the principles as

following:

1. The sustainability principle contains the understanding that the source of the source

the water power is organized by maintaining the resource function

the water is sustainable.

2. Balance principles contain notions for always

placing social functions, environmental functions, and economical functions

harmoniously.

3. General Asas benefits generously with the understanding that management

water resources are implemented to provide a benefit of the size-

magnitude for the general interest in an effective and efficient way.

4. The principle of allotedness and uniformity contain the understanding that

the management of the water resources is done in the realization

the centennial for a variety of interests and attention to the natural nature of the water

the dynamic.

5. Asas justice contains the understanding that water resource management

is done evenly to the entire community layer in the region of the motherland,

so that each citizen is entitled to the same opportunity

for role and enjoy the results in real and still provide

protection to a community layer whose economic level

lacks.

6. Self-reliance asas contains the understanding that resource management

water power is done with regard to the capabilities and advantages

of the local resources.

7. Principles of transparency and accountability contain notions that

the management of water resources is done openly and can be

accounted for.

With those principles, the water resources need to be thoroughly managed,

integrated and environmentally insightful for the purpose of realising the benefit

A copy of this ruling is not for and cannot be used as a Official reference or evidence. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

68 COPIES OF THE RULING RI CONSTITUTIONAL COURT RULING Downloaded from the page: www.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id

A sustainable source of water for a great deal of prosperity

the people. In other words, Invite-

Invite the SDM to be the embodiment of the Constitution of the Constitution of 1945

in particular Article 33 of the paragraph (3) which states, " Earth and water and wealth

the nature contained within it is controlled by the state and used

for the great extent of the prosperity of the people. "

The Scope Set Out In The SDA Act

In realizing the sustainable resources of water resources for

the great prosperity of the people and with regard to the foundation of thought

as well as the principles of the have been described above, then the SDA Act was drafted

with the substance of the arrangement that includes among others:

1. Conservation of water resources.

2. "Water Resources".

3. Waterbending power control

4. Empowerment and improving community roles.

5. Increased availability and openness of data as well as resource information

water; and

6. Management processes that include planning, construction execution, and

operations and expectations.

against the presumption of the applicants stating the provisions of Article 6, Section 7, Section 8, Article 9, Article 10, Section 26, Section 29 of the paragraph (2) and paragraph (5), Section 45, Section 46, Section 48 of the paragraph (1), Section 49 of the paragraph (1), Section 80, Section 91, Section 92, paragraph (2), paragraph (2), paragraph (2) and paragraph (2), Section 28C of the paragraph (2), Section 28D of the paragraph (1), Section 28D of the paragraph (1), Section 28D of the paragraph (1), Section 28D of the paragraph (1), Article 28D of the paragraph (1), section 28D, section verse (1), Article 28I paragraph (4) and Article 33 of the paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the Basic Law of 1945, according to the Applicant considered: 1. The Water Resources Act contains the mastery charge and the source monopoly-

a source of water as opposed to the principles controlled by the state and

is used for the greater prosperity of the people.

2. The SDA Act contains the charge that the use of water

is skeaed for commercial importance and may trigger a conflict

horizontally.

3. The SDA Act eliminates the country ' s responsibility in fulfillment of the need

water.

A copy of this ruling is not for and may not be used as an official referral or evidence tool. For more information, contact Kepaniteraan and the General Secretariat of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia, Jl. Independence West No. 6, Jakarta 10110, Telp. (021) 23529000, Fax (021) 3520177, Email: sekretariat@mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id