8

g) Azas development must remain imbued Pancasila, that development

not only produces prosperity but must also guarantee

social justice.

h) That maintains and embodied the execution of Pancasila and

UUD 1945 let us be together.

i) That science and science and technology can be learned from

Other advanced nations, but the provisions of leadership, watak and

determination must be taken and be redeemed from the history of struggle and

the personality and culture of the nation.

j) That The behavior and deeds of the leaders and the state officials

must be an example that is truly a manifestation

of Pancasila values and the 1945 Constitution.

k) That Pancasila is a unique values of the nation's personality

Indonesia.

l) That Pancasila is a sublime value born and grew from

our history and culture.

m) That modern society of ideals should remain soulless

and Indonesian-faced.

n) That Pancasila society is a religious socialistic society

(5th and 1st sila).

o) That if Pancasila does not touch real life, it does

feel his form in everyday life then slow

his understanding will blur and allegiances to Pancasila, over-more

generation to It's coming down and the Pancasila's just gonna be

memories.

7. From the description and the data above can be drawn to the conclusion that

Pancasila was excavated from the fundamental values, values of personality and values

the culture of the people of the ancestors of the Indonesian nation. Thus

Pancasila is a fused soul and rooted in blood and blood

meat for the Indonesian people, hence the so-called "true" Pancasila man (Pancasilais).

8. What about the WNI 's descendants who are indeed their ancestors

is not an Indonesian nation, which does not have basic values, values

personality, cultural values and the sublime values of the nation' s culture

9

as the ancestors of the Indonesian people, do they have this

understand, memorise, and exude Pancasila?

While they never learned the moral knowledge of Pancasila and

participate in the P4 exposure because of the small schools overseas if inside

the country is limited in their communities.

Therefore the applicant please to the Constitutional Court in order

a statement of loyalty to the Pancasila should be attached to

a certificate that states once followed the central level of P4

for the candidate of the President/Vice President, Caleg, Governor and beyond

in accordance with its level of origin, especially for the descendants of the WNI.

9. In actuality many Members of the House, Provincial Council or DPRD

The City/County do not memorized the sila-sila in Pancasila.

10.In terms of responsibility for the actions that are contrary to

Pancasila, Basic Law 1945 and the Proclamation of 17 August

1945 conducted by the President, Vice President, Regional Chief, Deputy

Regional Head, Member of the DPD, Member of the House, DPRD Province or DPRD

City/County. It should be in effect a liability term with

Leader of the Political Party or the Combined Political Party which provides Warranty and Recommend.

11.That Article 163 IS has divided the population of the Dutch East Indies in 3 (three)

group, that is:

a. European group

b. Chinese, Indian, and other Asian types

c. Indigenous group

12.That Article 6 of the paragraph (1) Basic Law of 1945 does not divide and

limit the group of Indonesian citizens, essentially all citizens

Indonesia can or may be the candidate of the President, Vice President

also the Regional Government Act and the Election Act.

13.Pemapplicant is aggrieved in the presence of Article 6 of the paragraph (1) Invite-

The Basic Invite of 1945 is due to more competition and

narrowing chances of the applicant and his descendants even for all

citizens of the native Indonesian people to being the candidate for President and Vice

President, Governor, Regent, Mayor, and legislative member in

overall due to competition for public office

10

it is no longer seen from the program and the credibility of the candidate is concerned

but is more emphasized in consideration of matter. As for other reasons

is also due to differences in principle and personality and

cultural characters with Indonesian citizens of descent.

On the basis of those reasons above the applicant pledging to

the Court The Constitution tests the Act of Pilpres, the Act

Election, the Act of Pemda as outlined in

Article 6 of the paragraph (1) of the Basic Law of 1945 with 2 (two) options

alternatives, namely:

a. Canceling 3 (three) of the Act above (The Pilpres Act,

Election, Pemda) in the articles related to the consequences

changes the ideology and course of the Pancasila state.

b. Or return to the Basic Law of 1945 before

Amendment that reads "President is the Native Indonesians".

14,Population and or Indonesian citizens are indeed a compound consisting of

of a variety of non-heterogeneous, non-heterogeneous people, not

such as heterogeneous Americans and consisting of various peoples,

Europe, Africa, and the multi-ethnic Asia.

15.Besides that our democracy is not a liberal democracy like America but

we adhere to Pancasila democracy.

16.That the applicant argues Article 6 of the paragraph (1) of the Basic Law 1945

contrary to Pancasila when it should be Article 6 of the paragraph

(1) It must be a guideline to Pancasila because Pancasila is

the source of all national law sources.

17.Pemapplicant realizes that changing the Basic Law is not

the Constitutional Court's authority, but if expecting MPR

convenes may be said to be almost impossible, because to

amendment the Basic Law is required 2/3 (two-thirds)

Member of the MPR.

IV. PETITUM

1. Accept and grant the applicant's request;

2. Interpreting Article 5 of the letter m Law No. 42/2008 on ELECTIONS

GENERAL PRESIDENT AND VICE PRESIDENT that reads "faithful to

11

Pancasila as the Basic State, Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945, the ideals of the Proclamation of Independence of August 17, 1945, and to the State of the Republic of Indonesia as well as the Government ". Especially The Frasa "faithful ..." must be equipped with adequate documents such as evidence to have followed and passed the penataran

P4 or an education equivalent to that. The phrase "Setia ....." not only

is evidenced by a letter of the statement with a seal of 6 thousand rupiah.

3. Interpreting Section 12 of the letter f and Article 51 of the paragraph (1) of the letter f Law Number 8/2012

of the General Election of the People's Representative Council,

THE REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL OF THE AREA, AND THE PEOPLE ' S REPRESENTATIVE COUNCIL

THE AREA that reads "faithful to the Pancasila as the Basic State, the Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945, the ideals of the Proclamation of Independence of August 17, 1945, and to the State of the Republic of Indonesia as well as the Government ". Especially the Fasa" loyal ... " must be equipped with sufficient documents such as proof

has followed and passed the P4 or education equivalent of

that. The phrase "Setia ..." Not only is it evidenced by a letter

statement with a stamp of 6 thousand rupiah.

4. Interpreting Article 58 of the letter b No. 32/2004 on GOVERNANCE

AREA that reads "loyal to Pancasila as the Basic State, Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945, ideals Proclamation of Independence August 17 1945, and to the Unity State of the Republic of Indonesia as well as the Government ". Especially the Fasa" loyal ... " must be equipped with sufficient documents such as proof

has followed and passed the P4 or education equivalent of

that. The phrase "Setia ....." is not only attested by a letter

statement with a seal of 6 thousand rupiah.

5. In connection with this we appeal to the Court

The Constitution for conducting testing and interpretation of the 3rd

The Act against Article 6 of the paragraph (1) of the Basic Act

1945.

6. Ordering this loading of the Country News as

should be.

12

Or

If the Assembly of Justice of the Court argues another, please the equitable verdict-

be fair (ex aequo et bono).

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

submitted a letter of letter proof/writing that was given a proof of P-1 proof up to

proof of P-7 as follows:

1. Proof of P-1: Photocopy Act No. 42 of 2008 on

The General Election of the President and Vice President;

2. Evidence P-2: Photocopied Act No. 8 of 2012 on

General Election of the People's Representative Council, Council

Regional Representative, and the Regional People's Representative Council;

3. Evidence P-3: Photocopy Act No. 32 of 2004 on

Local Government;

4. Evidence P-4: Photocopy of the Election Commission Regulation No. 27 Year

2009 on the Technical Guidelines Tata Cara Candidacy In

General Election of the President and Vice President of the Year 2009;

5. Evidence P-5: Photocopy of the General Election Commission Regulation Number 13 of the Year

2008 about the Technical Guidelines of the Research Methods, Verification,

The Redemption, and the Candidacy For The Individual Voting Participants

General Members Of The Regional Representative Council 2009;

6. Evidence P-6: Photocopy of the Election Commission Regulation Number 18 of the Year

2008 on the Technical Guidelines the Nomination of Councillors

People's Representative, Provincial Regional People's Representative Council,

and the Regional People's Representative Council County/City In

General Election Year 2009;

7. Evidence P-7: Photocopy of the General Election Commission Regulation No. 68 of the Year

2009 on the Technical Guidelines Tata Cara Candidacy Candidacy

General of the Regional Head and Deputy Regional Head.

[2.3] weighed that to shorten the description in this ruling,

everything that happens in the trial is quite appointed in the news of the event

the trial, which is one unbreakable unity with

this ruling;

13

3. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

[3.1] Draw that the question of the request of the applicant is

testing Act No. 42 of 2008 on Elections

President and Vice President (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia) 2008

Number 176, Additional Gazette Republic of Indonesia Number 4924,

subsequently called Act 42/2008), Act No. 8 of 2012 concerning

General Elections of the People's Representative Council, Regional Representative Council,

and the Regional People's Representative Council (State Sheet of the Republic of Indonesia

2012 Number 117, Additional State Sheet Republic Indonesia Number

5316, subsequently called 8/2012), and Act No. 32 Year 2004

on Regional Governance (Indonesian Republic of Indonesia Year 2004)

Number 125, Addition Of State Sheet Republic Indonesia No. 4437,

subsequently called Act 32/2004) against the Basic States Act

Republic of Indonesia in 1945 (next called UUD 1945);

[3.2] weighed that before considering the subject of a plea,

The Constitutional Court (next called the Court) first would

consider:

a. The Court's authority to prosecute a quo; and

b. Legal standing (legal standing) applicant;

Constitutional authority

[3.3] weighing that under Article 24C paragraph (1) Constitution of 1945, Article 10

paragraph (1) 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 Year 2003 concerning

Constitutional Court (State Sheet of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2011 Number

70, Indonesia's Republic of Indonesia Number 5226, next

called the MK Act), Article 29 paragraph (1) letter a Law No. 48 Year 2009

on the Power of Justice (State of the Republic of Indonesia of the Year

2009 number 157, Additional Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 5076),

one of the authorities The Court is prosecuting at first level and

14

the last of the disconnect is final to test the Act against

Constitution of 1945;

[3.4] Draw that the applicant's plea is to test

the constitutionality of the Act, in casu Article 5 of the m Act 42/2008, Article 12

letter f and Article 51 paragraph (1) letter f Act 8/2012, and Section 58 letter b Act 32/2004

against the Constitution of 1945, therefore the Court of Justice to prosecute

plea a quo;

Occupation of Law (Legal Standing) The applicant

[3.5] A draw that under Article 51 of the paragraph (1) of the MK Act, which may

apply for testing the Act against the Constitution of 1945 is

those who consider the rights and/or its constitutional authority

provided by the Constitution of 1945 are harmed by the expires an Act, that is:

a. Individual citizens of Indonesia (including groups of people

have common interests);

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; or

d. state agencies;

Thus, the applicant in testing the Act against the UUD

1945 must explain and prove first:

a. The applicant's position as referred to in Article 51 of the paragraph (1) of the MK Act;

b. the absence of the constitutional rights and/or constitutional authority provided by

The 1945 Constitution resulting from the enactment of the Act

is mohoned testing;

[3.6] It is also that the Court has since the Court's termination. The number

006 /PUU-III/2005, dated 31 May 2005 and the Court of Justice Number

11 /PUU-V/2007, dated 20 September 2007, as well as the ruling

further established that the loss of rights and/or constitutional authority

as defined by Article 51 of the paragraph (1) the MK bill must meet five conditions,

that is:

15

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. (causal verband) link between the intended loss

and the expiring Act (s) of the testing;

e. It is possible that with the request of a request then

constitutional losses such as those that are postured will not or no longer occur;

[3.7] Draw that the applicant is a person of the citizen

Indonesia Postulate that the constitutional right granted by Article

6 paragraph (1) of the Constitution of 1945 has been violated by the enactment of Article 5 of the m Act

42/2008, Section 12 of the letter f and Article 51 of the letter f Act 8/2012, and Article 58

letter b Act 32/2004, for the following reasons as follows:

1. That one of the requirements of being a candidate for President and a candidate for Vice

The President defined in Article 5 of the letter m Act 42/2008 is, "faithful

to Pancasila as the basis of the state, the State Basic Law

The Republic of Indonesia in 1945, and the ideals of the Proclamation of 17 August 1945.

According to the Applicant Explanation of the Section 5 letter m that states,

"The Requirements of Loyalty to Pancasila as the basis of the state, Act

Basic State of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945, and the ideals of Proclamation 17

August 1945 is based on the Party leadership recommendations and guarantees

Politics or the Combined Political Party ", in reality the giver

The recommendations and guarantmen are the leadership of the Party of Politics or the Combined Party of the Party

Politics not being asked to be responsible for recommendation and guarantee

it;

2. That the requirements of being an Election participant in the House members ' Election

The People's Representative, Regional Representative Council, and the People's Representative Council

Provincial and District/City areas under Article 12 of the letter f and Section 51

paragraph (1) f Act 8/2012 must be eligible among others, that is, "faithfully

to Pancasila as the basis of the country, the Country Basic Law

16

The Republic of Indonesia in 1945, and the ideals of the Proclamation of 17 August 1945 ".

According to the applicant a loyal statement to Pancasila as the basis of the state,

The Basic Law of 1945 which was signed by the will of the candidate

in question on the paper meted as determined in

Election Commission Regulation No. 13 of 2008 and Regulation

The Election Commission No. 18 of 2008 did not have any legal force

strong;

3. That Article 58 of the letter b 32/2004, states the Candidate of the Regional Head and

The Deputy Head of the Regions is the citizens of the Republic of Indonesia who meet

terms, among them, "loyal to Pancasila as the Basic State, Invite-

Invite Basic State of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945, the ideals of Proclamation 17

August 1945, and to the State of the Republic of Indonesia as well as

Governments. According to the applicant statement "faithful" as described

in the Description of Article 58 of the letter b and "the letter never

sentenced to prison ..." as stated in the Commission Regulation

General Election No. 68 of 2009 has no legal force which

is strong as a guarantee that the Regional Head and Deputy Chief of loyal Regions

to Pancasila as the base of the country, the State Basic Law

Republic of Indonesia In 1945, and the ideals of the Proclamation of 17 August 1945.

[3.8] weighed that based on Article 51 of the paragraph (1) MK Act and

the Court's ruling on legal standing (legal standing) as well as

is associated with the loss experienced by the applicant, according to the Court:

The applicant has a constitutional right granted by the Constitution of 1945,

in particular Article 6 of the paragraph (1), and the applicant considers the constitutional right

to be harmed by the enactment of the Act of the Motion

testing;

The applicant ' s constitutional loss is specific (special) and actual or

At least a potential that according to reasonable reasoning can be confirmed

will occur;

there is a causal relationship (causal verband) between the loss in question

and the Act of the Moed testing, as well as any

17

the possibility that with the granted of the application then the loss

the constitutionality as postulate will not or no longer occur;

Based on such consideration, the Court argued, the applicant has

legal standing (legal standing) to apply for a quo;

[3.9] Draw that by the court of competent court

a a quo plea, and the applicant has a legal position (legal standing)

to apply for a quo, next The Court will

consider the subject of a request;

Subject to

Court opinion

[3.10] A draw that before considering the subject,

The court needs to quote Article 54 of the MK Act. which states, "Court

Constitution can request the captions and/or meeting treatises

with the application being checked out to the Consultative Assembly

People, DPR, Council Regional Representative, and/or President" in doing

testing For an Act. In other words, the Court may

request or not to request the captions and/or meeting treatises in respect of

with the application being checked out to the Consultative Assembly

People, House of Representatives, Council The Regional Representative, and/or the President,

depends on the urgency and relevance. With respect to the a quo application,

The court sees no urgency and relevance for requesting

the captions and/or meeting treatises of the People's Consultative Assembly, Council

People's Representative, House of Representatives The area, and/or the President, so

The Court directly discharges a quo;

[3.11] It is balanced that the applicant on the cigarette makes a request

testing of the constitutionality of Article 5 of the letter m Act 42/2008, Article 12 letter f and

Article 51 paragraph (1) letter f Act 8/2012, as well as Article 58 of the letter b Act 32/2004 Against

18

Section 6 of the paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution for that reason in paragraph

[3.7];

[3.12] Draw that after the Court examined with the witness

a request a quo and the evidence The papers submitted by the applicant,

The court argued for the following:

The suggestion that in its request, the applicant postulate, among others:

1. That one of the requirements of being a candidate for President and a candidate for Vice

The President defined in Article 5 of the letter m Act 42/2008 is, "faithful

to Pancasila as the basis of the state, the State Basic Law

The Republic of Indonesia in 1945, and the ideals of the Proclamation of 17 August 1945.

According to the Applicant Explanation of Section 5 of the letter m which states,

"The Requirements of Loyalty to Pancasila as the basis of the state, Invite-

Invite the State of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945, and ideals

Proclamation of August 17, 1945 is based on recommendations and guarantees

Political Party or Political Party leadership ", in reality

The recommendation and guarantor of the Political Party leadership or

The Combined Political Party is not required to be responsible for

recommendations and Such warranties;

2. That the requirements of being an Election participant in the House members ' Election

People's Representative, Regional Representative Council, and the House of Representatives

People's Regional and Provincial People's Region/City under Article 12 of the letter f and

Article 51 of the paragraph (1) The Act 8/2012 must be eligible among others,

"allegiance to Pancasila as the basis of the state, the Basic Law

The Republic of Indonesia in 1945, and the ideals of Proclamation 17

August 1945". According to the applicant a loyal statement to Pancasila

as the basis of the state, the Basic Law of 1945 signed

by the will of the candidate in question on the papers of the signet

as determined in General Election Commission Rule

19

13 Year 2008 and the Election Commission Regulation No. 18 Year

2008 did not have a strong legal force;

3. That Article 58 of the letter b 32/2004, states the candidate of the Regional Head

and the Deputy Head of the Regions are the citizens of the Republic of Indonesia who

qualify, among them, "loyal to Pancasila as the Basis

The State, Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945,

ideals Proclamation 17 August 1945, and to the State of the Union

Republic of Indonesia as well as the Government ". According to the applicant, the statement

" faithful " as described in the Description of Section 58 of the letter b

and " letter of information never sentenced to prison ..." as

stated in the General Election Commission Regulation No. 68 Year

2009 does not have a strong legal force as a guarantee that

The Regional Head and Vice The Head of the Regions loyal to Pancasila as

the base of the country, the Basic Law of the Republic of the Republic of Indonesia of the Year

1945, and the ideals of the Proclamation 17 August 1945.

The argument that is based on these reasons the applicant pleads to

the court for:

1. Interpreting Section 5 of the letter m Act 42/2008, reads, "faithful to

Pancasila as the Basic State, the Constitution of the Republic of the Republic

Indonesia Year 1945, ideals of the Independence Proclamation 17 August 1945,

and to the State of the Republic of Indonesia as well as the Government ",

especially the phrase"faithfully ... " must be equipped with documents that

adequate as evidence has followed and passed the P4 or

education equivalent to that. The phrase "faithfully..." is not only attested

with a letter of statement with a seal of 6 thousand rupiah.

2. Interpreting Section 12 of the letter f and Article 51 of the letter f Act 8/2012,

reads, "faithful to Pancasila as the Basic State, Act

Basic State of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945, the ideals of Proclamation

Independence August 17, 1945, and to the Republic of the Republic of the Republic

Indonesia as well as the Government ", especially the phrase"faithfully ... " must be furnished