Pornography Law

Judicial Review on Pornography Law

VIVAnews - The Constitutional Court holds a hearing on judicial review on the Law No.44/08 on Pornography today, Monday, Feb. 23.

Andai Tak Ada Championship Series, Borneo FC Sudah Juara Liga 1 Musim Ini

The judicial review on Pornography Law is filed by 11 civil society institutions (LSM) including Pemuda Sinode, the North Sulawesi Representatives of the Indonesian Youth Committee (KNPI), Manado Catholic Youth, North Sulawesi representatives of Indonesian Christian Youth Movement (GAMKI), the Women Commission of the Christian Evangelical Church in Minahasa, Minahasa Customary Council, Manado Trans-Church Youth Forum, North Sulawesi Indonesian National Movement (GMNI), Student Executive Body (BEM) of the Language and Art Faculty of Manado State University, and South Minahasa Youth Alliance.

They asked that the judges declare Articles 1(1), 4(1) and 10 of the Law on Pornography as against the 1945 Constitution.

Rampung Juni 2024, Menteri ESDM: Divestasi Saham Freeport Sepaket dengan Perpanjangan Kontrak

They deem said articles to be against their constitutional rights. They assert that the law is not clear with regard to the definition of pornography, in addition to causing damages to art workers in terms of their making a living, especially in the region of Minahasa where they make their living by selling art work that explicitly or indirectly contains elements of nudity.

The panel of Constitutional judges stated that the appellant's appeal for judicial review is inconsistent. The panel, headed by judge Maria Farida Indrati, views that the applicants' legal representative is not diligent because the appeal does not correspond with the relevant articles. "[The appeal] does not correspond to the articles that are being questioned. Please fix this appeal," said judge Indrati.

Meanwhile, Akil Muchtar, member of the judges' panel states that it is not clear which part of the Law is being disputed, whether article 4  as a whole or clause (1) of article 4.  Muchtar therefore asked the legal representatives to re-read the appeal. "As legal representatives, you must be diligent," he said.

6 Tradisi Unik Merayakan Hari Paskah dari Berbagai Negara

In addition, the judges also questioned the appellants' legal standing. "It has to be explained. The appellants represent the people of Minahasa, and yet they also mention Betawi, Papua and so on," said member of the judges panel Mukthie Fadjar.

Fadjar said that in the appeal, the majority of the appellants are members of organizations. As such, they have to obtain a mandate from the organizations they represent. "If there is no mandate, other members of the organization might reject [the appeal]," said Fadjar.

After the hearing, the appellants' legal representative, Rico Pandeirot, admitted that there was a typing error in the appeal with regard to the articles being disputed. He said he would take into consideration the input provided by the judges during the hearing. "We will fix it," said Pandeirot.

In response to the legal standing issue, Pandeirot said that in principle the applicants are the people of Minahasa, that there are mass organizations and indigenous societies behind the appeal. "But we are looking at this from the perspective of the archipelagic unity."

The Anti-Pornography Law is ratified by the House of Representatives in a plenary meeting on Thursday, Oct. 30 2008. There were two factions which walked out from the meeting, the Indonesian Democratic Party for Struggle (PDI-P) and Prosperous Peace Party (PDS) Fraction.

30 days after the bill's ratification, the President signed the bill into law. There were still polemics after the law has been signed. There are some articles in the law which are rejected by the Bali and Papua society. The Yogyakartan queen, Gusti Kanjeng Ratu Hemas, also denied the law and even joined a demonstration in Bali.

--

VIVAnews journalists Elin Yunita Kristanti, Arry Anggadha and Eko Huda S. contributed to this article.

Halaman Selanjutnya
Halaman Selanjutnya