The Constitutional Court granted a petition for judicial review
regarding the rules of emptying the religious column on Family Card (KK)
and Identity Card (KTP).
It is regulated in Article 61 Paragraphs (1) and (2), and Article 64 paragraph (1) and (5) of Law No. 23 of 2006 concerning Population Administration juncto Law No. 24 of 2013 on Law on Adminduk.
Test material submitted by Nggay Mehang Tana, Pagar Demanra Sirait, Arnol Purba and Carlim with case number 97 / PUU-XIV / 2016.
In its verdict, the Panel of Judges is of the opinion that the word
"religion" in Article 61 paragraph (1) and Article 64 paragraph (1) is
contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and has no conditional binding
legal force as long as it does not include believers.
That is, believers have the same legal status as those of six religions who have been recognized by the government in obtaining rights related to population administration.
"The Panel of Judges granted the petition of the Petitioners to the whole, stating the word 'religion' in Article 61 Paragraph (1) and Article 64 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 23 Year 2006 concerning the Population Administration as amended by Act Number 24 2013 on the Amendment of Law Number 23 Year 2006 is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and does not have a conditional binding legal force as long as it does not include the flow of trust, "said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Arief Hidayat when reading the verdict at the hearing in the Constitutional Court building, Central Jakarta on Tuesday (7/11/2017).
In addition, continued Arief, the Court decided Article 61 Paragraph (2) and Article 64 paragraph (5) of the Adminduk Law is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and has no binding legal force.
Article 61 Paragraph 2 reads, "A description of the religious column as referred to in paragraph (1) for the Population whose religion has not been recognized as a religion in accordance with the provisions of the Law or for the believer is not filled, but still served and recorded in the population database."
Article 64 paragraph 5 states, "The element of religious resident data as referred to in paragraph (1) for a population whose religion has not been recognized as a religion based on the provisions of the Laws or for the believer is not filled but remains served and recorded in the population database."
Thus, the status of the believer may be included in the religious column of the CoW and KTP.
The applicants previously assessed that the provisions in the Adminduk Law were deemed incapable of guaranteeing the protection and fulfillment of the same rights to believers to God Almighty or a believer, as a citizen.
In his request, Nggay and his friends asked the Panel of Justices of the Constitutional Court declared Article 61 paragraph 1 and Article 64 paragraph 1 of the Population Administration Law is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution.
Therefore, the article being tested has no binding legal force as long as it is not interpreted as a "religion as well as any belief and religion".
In other words, the religious columns on KK and KTP are abolished.
The reasons of the applicant, the articles being tested are not clearly and logically arranged, resulting in different interpretations and violations of the basic rights of citizens.( translate. kompas)
It is regulated in Article 61 Paragraphs (1) and (2), and Article 64 paragraph (1) and (5) of Law No. 23 of 2006 concerning Population Administration juncto Law No. 24 of 2013 on Law on Adminduk.
Test material submitted by Nggay Mehang Tana, Pagar Demanra Sirait, Arnol Purba and Carlim with case number 97 / PUU-XIV / 2016.
In its verdict, the Panel of Judges is of the opinion that the word
"religion" in Article 61 paragraph (1) and Article 64 paragraph (1) is
contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and has no conditional binding
legal force as long as it does not include believers.That is, believers have the same legal status as those of six religions who have been recognized by the government in obtaining rights related to population administration.
"The Panel of Judges granted the petition of the Petitioners to the whole, stating the word 'religion' in Article 61 Paragraph (1) and Article 64 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 23 Year 2006 concerning the Population Administration as amended by Act Number 24 2013 on the Amendment of Law Number 23 Year 2006 is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and does not have a conditional binding legal force as long as it does not include the flow of trust, "said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Arief Hidayat when reading the verdict at the hearing in the Constitutional Court building, Central Jakarta on Tuesday (7/11/2017).
In addition, continued Arief, the Court decided Article 61 Paragraph (2) and Article 64 paragraph (5) of the Adminduk Law is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution and has no binding legal force.
Article 61 Paragraph 2 reads, "A description of the religious column as referred to in paragraph (1) for the Population whose religion has not been recognized as a religion in accordance with the provisions of the Law or for the believer is not filled, but still served and recorded in the population database."
Article 64 paragraph 5 states, "The element of religious resident data as referred to in paragraph (1) for a population whose religion has not been recognized as a religion based on the provisions of the Laws or for the believer is not filled but remains served and recorded in the population database."
Thus, the status of the believer may be included in the religious column of the CoW and KTP.
The applicants previously assessed that the provisions in the Adminduk Law were deemed incapable of guaranteeing the protection and fulfillment of the same rights to believers to God Almighty or a believer, as a citizen.
In his request, Nggay and his friends asked the Panel of Justices of the Constitutional Court declared Article 61 paragraph 1 and Article 64 paragraph 1 of the Population Administration Law is contradictory to the 1945 Constitution.
Therefore, the article being tested has no binding legal force as long as it is not interpreted as a "religion as well as any belief and religion".
In other words, the religious columns on KK and KTP are abolished.
The reasons of the applicant, the articles being tested are not clearly and logically arranged, resulting in different interpretations and violations of the basic rights of citizens.( translate. kompas)
Comments