DPR Accused of Violating Oath of Office and Contempt of Court

Jakarta (Antara Bali) - Chairman of the Regional Representative Council (DPD) Irman Gusman said the House of Representatives (DPR) has violated  its oath of office for failure to abide by the decision of the Constitutional Court on  the revision of the Law on MD3.

The DPR has revised the law on People's Consultative Assembly, DPR, regional legislative assembly (DPRD)  and DPD (MD3) without involving DPD.

DPR has failed to abide by the decision of the Constitutional Court  and it is a violation of the oath of office and a contempt of court, said Irman here on Tuesday.

Irman as the chairman of DPD has sought judicial review  by the Constitutional Court of the MD3 Law.  

He said the process of revising the Law on MD3 was a break of the 1945 Constitution , which gives DPD constitution authority to propose and discuss a draft law.

But, the fact is  DPD was not involved the process of drafting  and approving the MD3 Law, he said.

According to the country's Constitution all decisions of the Constitutional Court is final and binding, therefore, all state institutions including DPR, President,  and DPD which have the legislation function should comply with the decision, he said.

Earlier, the Constitutional Court in its decision  No 92/PUU-X/2012 ruled  that DPD must be involved in drafting law regulations  related to the authority of DPD based on  the chapter of  22D point (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

"We, therefore, have strong conviction that the laws which were debated without involving DPD as ruled in chapter 22D point 2 of the 1945 Constitution are unconstitutional products," Irman said.

Expert in  Constitutional Law from the Indonesian Islam University , Nimatul Huda, said DPD has to be involved in discussing MD3 Law.

"The involvement of DPD in the debate on MD3  Law is ruled by the constitution especially on laws related to arrangement of position , duties , authority , rights  and obligations  of provincial DPRD, district and city DPRD," Nimatul told the Constitutional court in a formal judicial examination of the MD3 Law case here on Tuesday. 

Nimatul said there has been disregard of the DPD authority in the MD3 Law debate  by not involving DPD. (WDY)