Members of mass organizations in West Java rally in front of the West Java Legislative Council to reject the existence of intolerant organizations in West Java on Tuesday (17/1). They consider the existence of intolerant mass organizations to be contrary to the principle of Pancasila, which upholds diversity.
The government has insisted that the issuance of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu) No. 2/2017 is an effort to protect the country. There are dangers in freedom of expression.
The government invites parties that do not agree with Perppu No. 2/2017 to request a test of materiality to the Constitutional Court. The "compelling crisis" stated as a condition for issuing the Perppu has triggered public reaction. The public has questioned what kind of crisis with almost every issuance of a Perppu. After all, the country is safe. The Constitution emphasizes that the Perppu is an inherent Presidential power.
According to hukumonline.com records, 207 Perppu have been issues from the Soekarno era through Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s presidency. Nearly all presidents have issued a Perppu. President Yudhoyono issued 16 Perppu during his tenure of 10 years. President Joko Widodo has issued three Perppu.
The legal basis for the issuance of the Perppu is Article 22 of the 1945 Constitution. The article reads: (1) in the case of compelling crisis, the President is entitled to issue a government regulation in lieu of law; (2) the government regulation is subject to approval by the House of Representatives (DPR) in the following plenary session; (3) if it is not approved, the government regulation is to be revoked.
The Constitution provides that space. The public may object, but the constitutional authority to accept the Perppu or not lies with the DPR. The "compelling crisis" is open to the government’s subjective interpretation. This interpretation may differ from the shadow of "compelling crisis" that is perceived by society. The government\'s subjectivity will be tested by the DPR. The Constitutional Court also has its interpretation of what is meant by“compelling crisis”.
Referring to the 16 Perppu issued by president Yudhoyono, such as Perppu No. 10/2008 on General Elections of the DPR, the Regional Representatives Council (DPD) and the Provincial/Regental Legislative Council (DPRD) and the Perppu on the Free Trade Zone and Free Port of Sabang, public perception was, indeed, that there was no compelling crisis. The two Perppu were, however, approved by the DPR.
Perppu No. 2/2017 has been effective since its issuance. Let the DPR take its decision on this Perppu. Even if it is thought a substance of the Perppu is contrary to the constitution, that it violates the freedom of association and organization, this remains the domain of the Constitutional Court.
Authoritarianism must be prevented. With Perppu No. 2/2017, the government can revoke the legality of mass organizations that are against Pancasila. However, the government must also be prepared for its decision to be challenged by the court. The mechanism of checks and balances and respecting judicial power should be put forward. This is the step toward democratic maturity within the framework of a state based on the rule of law, or nomocracy.
