Redesign Papua Conflict Resolution

Redesign Papua Conflict Resolution
By David Raja Marpaung

Understanding the roots of conflict in Papua• Papua problem has become tangled konfik cycle for few decades in Indonesia, therefore there is no cheap and easy way , except for the hard work of the 'sweating' and a higher risk of all parties.

 • Based on the results of studies that have been made TIM LIPI in Papua Road Map can be concluded that the sources of Papua konfik can be grouped into four main issues, namely, first, marginalization and discrimination experienced by indigenous Papuans as a result of economic development, cultural policy and the mass migration in Papua since 1970 until today. The second problem is the failure of development and it is necessary for such a new paradigm of development in Papua. The third problem is the contradiction of understanding the history of integration and the construction of political identities between Papua and Jakarta. The fourth problem is the experience of a long history of political violence in Papua, especially those committed by state actors against Indonesian citizens in Papua.Reflecting on the mapping of the root causes of conflict in Papua, then at least there is some conflict mitigation solutions that can be offered to the 

A. Short-Term SolutionIn the short term period, there are two things to get attention of the stakeholders in the conflict in Papua.

Phase 1. Desecuritization Papua Conflict• It should be noted that desekuritisasi not mean a total reduction of security forces in Papua. However, desekuritisasi security approach is a model more in line with the principles of democracy and peaceful conflict resolution. Associated with the TNI desecuritization covers the main aspects. First, each placement (deployment) military personnel in Papua have to go through a political decision between the government and the House of Representatives or in accordance with military law mandated mechanisms. It is important to avoid the occurrence of behavioral / illegal operation. Second, the placement of military personnel in Papua should be measured both the quantity, quality, duration and target its operations so that the people of Indonesia as a whole can monitor the performance of TNI in Papua. Then, thirdly, the military should be used wherever possible approaches to non-violence (more persuasive than repressive) in Papua. It is very important, considering the face of 'Indonesia' in Papua is often recognized only to the extent of violence forces rather than as an entity that protects all the people of Papua.

• In relation to law enforcement (police) then they should immediately evaluate the security policies in Papua. Often, law enforcement officers acted in accordance with its identity as the state apparatus, especially in the context of the interests of foreign corporations in Papua. As a result, it is not surprising when there are still people who think that the Papua law enforcement in Indonesia is a form of 'colonization' of the land of Papua is not 'The Indonesia's' sense of justice because they are injured. Discriminatory practices by the authorities should be evaluated by the government because it will further aggravate the face of 'Indonesia' in Papua

• In addition, the Government may use the instrument of internal control in monitoring the performance of state officials in Papua, for example by placing a representative / office of National Human Rights Commission, Ombudsman, Kompolnas, Agency in Papua; It can be effective as a state institution in charge of giving a correction to other state agencies as well as provide security for the people of Papua.

• Strategically, desekuritisasi will foster mutual trust both between governments and people of Papua that the conflict can be resolved without any suspicion by the dominance of the security approach. This then encourages the formation of the next stage.

Phase 2. Strengthen the dialogue as a discourse of conflict resolution• Both the government and the Papuan people must realize that dialogue is a model of conflict resolution that occupy the top priority. Government should be encouraged to realize that so far there has been marginalized politically, socially, economically and culturally to the people of Papua in the context of Indonesia's All. Meanwhile, the Papuan people should also realize that violence is not the only way to remind the government's negligence. Build this awareness is the key for both parties (government and people of Papua) to be able to sit together and discuss solutions to offer.• Discourse dialogue must gain legitimacy from both sides, rather than a party merely to avoid the politicization of the peace efforts of either party. 

B. Long-Term SolutionWhen desecuritization Papua conflict has been implemented and intensified dialogue discourse, then the next step was to conduct a dialogue that includes three stages: 

Phase 1. Identification of actors and issues in the dialogue• In the context of dialogue, identification of actors into the process early will determine the legitimacy of the dialogue. It is important to prevent any parties who feel excluded from conflict resolution and potentially disrupt the dialogue.• Identification of actors should carefully consider the issues to be discussed and the interest to be negotiated in the dialog.• In addition, it should also be noted that a representative of the location of the dialogue as an observer and mediator / party agenda to keep the dialogue remains consistent.

Phase 2. Importance of Reconciliation in Dialogue• The main purpose of dialogue is to build mutual trust between the actors in the conflict to want to talk about conflict resolution that can be agreed.• One of the key elements to build trust is through reconciliation.• Reconciliation requires a mutual understanding between the parties to the conflict that they are 'victims' of conflict with violence.• Therefore, efforts to resolve the conflict by force will only add to the victim in each of the parties without any constructive solution for the future of Papua.

Phase 3. Build understanding that dialogue is sustainability (continuity)• Dialogue is not how fast (instant) to resolve the conflict. However, the dialogue is how to manage conflict more dignified than the use of violence will only lead to losses on each side.• Model ways of thinking (mindset) like it should dominate every actor in dialogue in order not to return to violence in the event of a deadlock in negotiations. Expected when there is deadlock in the negotiations, each actor must hold back and re-scheduled dialogue with a clearer mind.Key Success Conflict Resolution in Papua• Resolution of conflict in Papua is not confined to the central government and the Papuan People alone, but the responsibility of the whole people of Indonesia. Here, the importance of strengthening the awareness of all the people of Indonesia that the identity of 'The Indonesia-ness' in Papua has been held hostage by violence in the conflict. Therefore, non-violent peace efforts to the conflict in Papua have to get the full support of all the people of Indonesia.• As a democratic country, then the ways of conflict resolution through violence in Indonesia is rightly not a priority. Instead, conflict resolution should be put in particular peaceful means through dialogue. Both the government and the groups involved in conflicts in Papua have to stop all acts of violence for any reason.Concluding Note• Settlement of the conflict in Papua is one of the major test for the Indonesian people to be able to resolve the conflict with dignity. In this context, at least Indonesia has had experience in resolving peacefully the conflict in Aceh.• Relies only on the government alone will not guarantee that problems can be resolved peacefully Papua. However, an even more important is to strengthen solidarity and solidity all elements of the Indonesian people to support and engage in real (concrete) in conflict resolution efforts of dignity to our brothers in Papua

Flight Information Region Issues Between Indonesia And Singapore

Flight  Information  Region Issues  

Between Indonesia And Singapore

By David Raja Marpaung S.IP M.Def

Identification of Problems

        Flight Information Region (FIR) is a division of airspace which aims to ensure flight safety and security established by countries belonging to the International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO).FIR is required for flight operations and are based media space flight safety considerations.

In the FIR implementation has generated a lot of obstacles both in Indonesia and the implementation of civil aviation and law enforcement operations in the region around Tanjung Pinang and Natuna conducted by both the Air Defense Command nationwide as well as by the Navy to conduct Maritime Operations, for the control of air space exists at the Singapore Air Traffic Control (ATC Singapore). 

For example the flight path from Tanjung Pinang to Ranai or otherwise can not fly straight, so it will add to the air time that will also add another pesawatContoh operating costs for military aircraft that will perform the operation, air patrol and military exercises around Natuna Batam and Tanjung Pinang was often hampered due to the setting of air space by Singapore ATC is merely prelude to her own kepenti. It hurts our sense of nationalism.

FIR zoning often does not refer to the country's airspace sovereign so often in conflict with the sovereignty of a country. Basic Flight Information Region, the laws contained in Article 28 of the Chicago Convention in 1944 and 1944 Chicago Convention Annex 11, which reads, "undertakes, so far as it may find practicable, to Provide, in its territory, airports, radio services, meteorological services, navigation and other water water facilities to facilitate international navigation, in accordance with the standards and practices recommended or established from time to time, pursuant to this Convention ".

However according to Annex 11, Indonesia may delegate scouting air traffic to the other country and it is also contained in Article 262 paragraph (1) point (a) and Law No. 1 Year 2009 on Aviation.Delegation does not reduce the sovereignty of the Republic of Indonesia. If Indonesia is considered to have capable, then the delegation is to be returned to Indonesia. Usually when a country has been unable to control its air space as has been experienced by Vietnam at the beginning of its independence, the ATC in the FIR airspace was taken over by the state of Thailand. With the same case with Indonesia, Vietnam is now taking over ATC in the FIR which was originally delegated to Thailand, which are required at the time of the Regional Air Navigation (RAN) Meeting in Bangkok

Singapore's current existence of FIR in accordance with the Agreement Between the Government of the Republic of Indonesia and the Government of the Republic of Singapore on the Realignment of the Boundary Between the Singapore Flight Information Region and the Jakarta Flight Information Region, dated 21 September 1995.H al principal contained in the agreement signed in 1995 are:

In Section 2 the agreement between Indonesia and Singapore which has been determined that the Indonesian delegate control of airspace in the Riau Islands Indonesia to Singapore (the Agreement between Indonesia and Singapore at the time it was just called the Natuna).

Agreement between Indonesia and Singapore are set to expire after five years from the signature, so the agreement on the delegation of Singapore FIR has ended on September 21, 2000. If the agreement had expired in 2000, then the laws of Singapore does not have the right to control the ATC in the Singapore FIR because it does not comply with the conditions set by ICAO, mainly in Annex 11.

Implications of the Singapore FIR

Mastery of the FIR by Seingapura Trafficc Air Control (air traffic control) then all aviation laws and regulations to follow rules made by the Singapore government. Therefore, the control of ATC by Singapore's national air sovereignty in the region, namely the Riau Islands has implications for Indonesia. The implications are as follows:

A. Violations of State Sovereignty in the Air

National Air Defense Command (Kohanudnas) through the unit under the command staffs Sector I (doormat I) has often captured the movement of foreign aircraft, especially military aircraft in the Riau Islands Singapore via Tanjung Pinang Unit 213 Radar and Radar Unit Natuna 212 aircraft movements without a Clearance light that should have become imperative if foreign aircraft flying in airspace Indonesia. This action is categorized as a black flight and an act of violation of national airspace. Airspace violations that occurred during 2008 in Kosekhanudnas 1 is 18 times and 15 times in 2009 (Data from Kosekhanudnas I, 2010)

B. Aspects of Air Defense weakness.

With limited land, sea and airspace at the same time, the control of ATC in Singapore is providing the opportunity and flexibility to Singapore to perform illegal acts such as intelligence activities, aerial photography and train pilots to carry out the exercise / training in Indonesian airspace. If this situation persists then the event of open conflict then Singapore will rely on speed and surprise.

C. Economic losses

The meaning of Article 6 of Republic Act Indonesi N0 1 in 2009

Flight of the very clearly states that the flight of foreign aircraft routes through Indonesia's national airspace must obtain permission from the government of Indonesia, and the government has the authority and responsibility to build a defense strategy and enhance the national economy by utilizing the air media.

In explanation of the article also mentioned that the airspace of the air space above the water and land of the Republic of Indonesia is a national treasure that must be harnessed for the magnitude for the benefit of the people, nation and state.

Indonesian Government Regulation No. 14 of 2000 on Tariffs on Non-Tax State Revenue applicable to the Department of Transportation made to optimize revenues to support the development of the country for the welfare of the people. From the economic aspect, the air space is definitely one of the sources of revenues other than oil and gas, as any flight over the territory of Indonesia subject to levy,

According to Tariff Section Chief of Air Transport Services Air Transport Directorate of the Ministry of Transportation: "The whole of Indonesia airspace by foreign aircraft crossed the international routes including the charges levied, except

A sector of the Singapore FIR are collected by the Singapore government and then submitted to the Government of Indonesia "

Restoring Sovereignty business

There has been some takeover attempts FIR has been delegated to Singapore. However, the problem when it is Government Regulation no. 38 of 2002 on the Register of Geographic Coordinates The base line of the dots Islands Indonesia has not been submitted to the Secretary-General.

Currently, government regulation has been revised and has been registered to the UN secretary general, so it needs to be taken steps to restructure the Singapore FIR are beneficial interest of Indonesia.

In case this is indeed unfortunate that, a new aviation law gives us a very long period of time is no later than 15 (fifteen) years to evaluate and eventually have been served by the institutions of national air navigation service providers.

But in the short term needs first proposed, the placement of Liasion Officer (LO) of ATS Kohanudnas in Singapore, and the need that there is a demand from Indonesia, Singapore ATS should give priority to civil and military aircraft conducting flight in Indonesia around the region.

President Impeachment Process in Indonesia

President Impeachment Process in Indonesia

I. Preliminary

In relation to the position of Head of State or Government, 'impeachment' means the calling or the prosecution to ask for accountability for violations of law allegation made in his tenure.Almost all state constitutions regulate the problem "impeachment" or "impeachment" as a legitimate and effective way to monitor the actions of the government in the constitution in order to avoid abuse of power (abuse of power / detournement de pouvoir).

Impeachment or impeachment issue is actually not a new thing.Even in our country, have come up before impeachment or impeachment against the President. Impeachment or impeachment is set in the Constitution of the State of Indonesia Year 1945 (UUD 1945), but along with the development of the state administration to the principles of modern democratic country that wants to amend the 1945 Constitution (Amendment), the process of impeachment and even then had a change anyway.

II. Legal Basis impeachment

There are several relevant legal basis pemkazulan process against the President and / or Vice President according to the 1945 Constitution, the MPR Decree No. 6/MPR/2010 of the Constitutional Committee and the Standing Orders of the Constitutional Court Regulation Number 21 Year 2009 on Guidelines for examining Opinion Breaking the House of Representatives Regarding the people of Alleged Violation by the President and / or Vice President.

A. ACT OF 1945

A. Article 7-A:

"The President and / or Vice President may be removed in the office by the People's Consultative Assembly upon the recommendation of the House of Representatives, both proved to have committed an offense of treason against the state, corruption, bribery, other felonies, or moral turpitude or if it is proven not longer qualify as a President and / or Vice President ".

2. Article 7-B paragraph (1):

"The proposal to impeach the President and / or Vice President may be brought by the House of Representatives only by first making a request to the Constitutional Court to examine, hear, and decide upon the opinion of the House of Representatives that the President and / or Vice President has violated the law in the form of betrayal of the countries, corruption, bribery, other felonies, or moral turpitude and / or that the President and / or Vice President is no longer eligible as President and / or Vice President ".

3. Article 7-B paragraph (2):

"The opinion of the House of Representatives that the President and / or Vice President has done pelnaggaran law or no longer meets the qualifications to serve as President and / or Vice President has violated the law or no longer qualify as a President and / or Vice President is in the framework of the House of Representatives oversight function ".

4. Article 7-B paragraph (3):

"The filing of a request Parliament to the Constitutional Court can only be done with the support of at least 2/3 of the members of Parliament who attended the plenary session attended by at least 2/3 of the members of the House of Representatives".

5. Article 7-B paragraph (4):

"The Constitutional Court shall examine, hear and decide the fairest of the opinion of the House of Representatives no later than ninety days after the request of the House of Representatives was received by the Constitutional Court".

6. Article 7-B paragraph (5):

"If the Constitutional Court ruled that the President and / or Vice President proved to have violated the law of treason against the state, corruption, bribery, other felonies, or moral turpitude, and / or the President and / or Vice-President no longer qualify as President and / or Vice President, House of Representatives held a plenary session to forward the proposal to impeach the President and / or Vice President to the People's Consultative Assembly "

7. Article 7-B paragraph (6):

"People's Consultative Assembly shall convene to decide on the proposal of the House of Representatives no later than thirty days from the People's Consultative Assembly accepted the proposal".

8. Article 7-B paragraph (7):

"The decision of the MPR over the proposal to impeach the President and / or Vice President must be taken in the People's Consultative paripurnaMajelis meeting attended by at least 2/3 of the members present, after the President and / or Vice President given the opportunity to submit an explanation in a plenary sessionPeople's Consultative Assembly ".

B. DECISION OF THE CONSULTATIVE ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA NUMBER: Rules of Procedure 6/MPR/2010 ON CONSULTATIVE ASSEMBLY OF THE REPUBLIC OF INDONESIA.

A. Article 5 letter c:

"Parliament decide on the proposal to dismiss the President and / or Vice President in his term, after the Court ruled that the President and / or Vice President proved to have violated the law of treason against the state, corruption, bribery, other felonies, or moral turpitude, and / or the President and / or Vice President is no longer eligible as President and / or Vice President ".

2. Article 5, letter d:

"Choose a Vice President of 2 (two) candidates nominated by the President if a vacancy occurs the position of Vice President in his term".

3. Article 112

(1) In the case of vacant Vice-President, the Assembly held a plenary session of the Assembly no later than 60 (sixty) days to elect a Vice President;

(2) Time of event the Plenary Session of the Assembly as referred to in paragraph (1) is decided at the Joint Meeting of the Assembly Chairman, Chairman of the fractions and Leadership Group Member;

(3) Joint Meeting referred to in paragraph (2) occur not later than 3 x 24 (three times twenty four) hours after the vacancy occurs the position of Vice President;

(4) The notice of the Assembly delivered a letter to the President on the outcome of the Joint Meeting as referred to in paragraph (2) no later than 3 x 24 (three times twenty four) hours after the joint meeting held;

(5) The notification referred to in paragraph (4) attached to the conditions that must be completed by candidates for Vice President in accordance with laws and regulations;

(6) the president proposes 2 (two) candidates for Vice President and completeness of the terms to the Executive Assembly, no later than 14 (fourteen) days prior to the Plenary Session of the Assembly;

(7) No later than 2 x 24 (two times twenty four) hours before the deadline of 14 (fourteen days) for the President submitted the proposal 2 (two) candidates for the Vice President referred to in paragraph (6), the Assembly held a Joint Meeting of the Assembly Leaders , Chairman of the factions and groups to form a verification team members;

(8) Verification Team as referred to in paragraph (7) in charge of verifying the completeness and correctness of the requirements document 2 (two) candidates for the Vice President referred to in paragraph (6);

(9) Verification Team as referred to in paragraph (7):

a. consists of at most 5% (five percent) of the Members of the faction and its composition reflects the Group Members in proportion;

b. membership is determined by the Decree of the MPR Chairman;

c. his tenure at the latest 7 (seven) days after the President gave the completeness of the terms of the Vice Presidential candidate referred to in paragraph (6);

d. can form a team of experts; and

e. report the results of its work to the Leadership Assembly;

(10) In this report the work of Tim Verification stating that the terms of one or 2 (two) candidates proposed by President Vice President is not yet complete, Chairman of the Assembly submit written notification to the President for the repair and / or complete no later than 4 (four) days before trial Paipurna Assembly referred to in paragraph (2) held;

(11) In the event that the conditions stated is incomplete as referred to in paragraph (10) then the Chairman may extend the service life of the Assembly Verification Team up to 1 x 24 (one time twenty-four) hours before the plenary session referred to in paragraph (2)held;

(12) In the event the terms still revealed incomplete after an extended period of employment verification team as referred to in paragraph (11) then the Chairman may invite the Assembly to postpone the implementation of the Joint Meeting of the Plenary Session as referred to in paragraph (2);

(13) Delays implementation of the Plenary Session as referred to in paragraph (12) does not exceed the time limit of 60 (sixty) days as referred to in paragraph (1);

(14) Chairman of the MPR set 2 (two) candidates for Vice-President nominated by the President referred to in paragraph (6) become a candidate for Vice President who has met the requirements to be selected based on the verification team reported its work;

(15) two (2) Candidates for the Vice President referred to in paragraph (14) must submit a statement of candidacy in the readiness of the Assembly plenary session before the election;

(16) Candidates for Vice President who gets the most votes in the election at the Plenary Session of the MPR set as Vice President;

(17) In the event that votes obtained by each candidate equally, the selection was repeated for 1 (one) time again;

(18) In the case of election referred to in paragraph (17) the result remains the same, the President chose one among the candidates for vice president;

4. Article 113:

"Vice President-elect referred to in Article 112 paragraph (16) or subsection (18) assigned to the Legislative Assembly".

C. CONSTITUTIONAL COURT OF REGULATION NO 21 OF 2009 GUIDELINES ON THE PROGRAM IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES decision on the opinion on the allegations VIOLATION BY THE PRESIDENT AND / OR VICE PRESIDENT.

This regulation consists of 10 Chapters and 23 Articles. Chapter I contains general provisions, Chapter II Parties, Chapter III Procedure for Filing an Application, Chapter IV Registration and Scheduling Case Assembly, Chapter V trial, Chapter VI Termination of Investigation Process, Chapter VII of the Consultative Meeting, ruling Chapter VIII, Chapter IX Provisionsothers, and Chapter X Closing.

A. Article 2:

(1) The Court's decision on the appeal opinion that the House is the House of Representatives represented by the head of the House of Representatives may appoint legal counsel;

(2) The alleged violation is the President and / or Vice President who can be assisted and / or represented by attorneys.

2. Article 3 paragraph (3) letter a:

"(3) Parliament shall clearly describe in their petition regarding:

a. President and / or Vice President has violated the law of treason against the state, corruption, bribery, other felonies, or moral turpitude ".

3. Article 4 paragraph (1):

"In this opinion the House erkaitan with allegations that the President and / or Vice President has violated the law as referred to in Article 3 paragraph (3) letter a, the petition must contain details on the type, time, and place of violation of law by the President and / or Vice President ".

4. Article 9 paragraph (1):

"The trial conducted by the Plenary of Judges attended by at least 7 (seven) constitutional justices."

5. Article 19

(1) The decision of the Court's opinion must be decided upon in the House of Representatives no later than 90 (ninety) days from the request is recorded in the BRPK ".

(5) Court decisions are final and legally binding for the Parliament as the party who filed the petition ".

6. Article 20

"Court decisions which the Parliament to grant the President did not rule out filing and / or Vice President in the trial of criminal, civil, and / or the state administration in accordance with the principles and laws of each event."

7. Article 21

"In terms of procedural law on the examination of DPR opinion has not been regulated in this Regulation, mutatis mutandis, apply the principles of criminal procedure, civil procedure law, procedural law and state administration".

III. Impeachment process in Indonesia

Impeachment or impeachment process in Indonesia took a long time and is not easy. The process of "impeachment" begins with a "proposed termination" of the House of Representatives to the Assembly about the alleged violation as defined in Section 7B, which must be requested prior to the Constitutional Court to examine, hear, and decide upon the opinion of the House of Representatives that the President and / or Vice President hashave violated the law in question.

However, prior to the existence of "the proposed dismissal of" the President and / or Vice President, Parliament must first use the "right to express opinions" of the implementation of control functions associated with the implementation of the right of "interpellation" or "right of inquiry" After using the right meyatakan opinion, the House of Representatives will form a special committee consisting of all elements of factions in the House with the House decision, which shall report the performance of its duties to the plenary session of the House of Representatives no later than 60 (sixty) days since the establishment of the special committee.

The next process is that if the House ultimately decided to accept the special committee report stating that a violation has occurred, then the next House of Representatives expressed their opinions to the decision of the Court. The Court further obligation to investigate, hear and decide the fairest of the opinion that the House of Representatives no later than 90 (Ninety) days after the request is received the Parliament's Constitutional Court. If the Court were to decide that the opinion of the House has proved, in the sense that it has been a violation of law is alleged, then the House will hold a plenary meeting to forward the proposal to impeach the President and / or Vice President to the MPR.

Is the impeachment process has been completed? No, because in accordance with the provisions of Article 7B paragraph (6) and paragraph (7) of the 1945 Constitution, at least 30 (thirty) days after receiving the proposal the Assembly shall hold a plenary session to decide upon the proposal to impeach the President and / or Vice President, attended by sekurangkurangnya ¾ of the members and approved by at least 2/3 of the members present, after the President and / or Vice President given the opportunity to submit an explanation in the plenary session of the Assembly.

IV. Possible Success (Level of Possibility)

Main obstacle is the impeachment process of Article 7-B paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution:

"The filing of a request Parliament to the Constitutional Court can only be done with the support of at least 2/3 of the members of Parliament who attended the plenary session attended by at least 2/3 of the members of the House of Representatives".

Judging from our coalition, the Democratic Party is currently the largest fraction, with the number of 148 persons or 26.42 per cent from 560 House members. Plus members of the Democratic vote if the PAN and the PKB will reach 222 people over a third alias legislators or 187 people.

Not to mention if the added noise and the Golkar Party, each MCC totaled 108 seats and 59 seats. Both parties have, until now still a government coalition with SBY-Boediono.

It can be concluded, from the composition of seats in Parliament politician, is almost impossible to overthrow the government of SBY-Boediono.

The second obstacle is blocking the impeachment was still able to inhibit the Democratic presidential impeachment process through the mechanism of judicial decision in the Constitutional Court. As is known, the Court amounted to 9 people with 3 people is a proposal of the President, three people from the proposed MA and 3 other people came from the House proposal. The Democrats will certainly try to influence the 3 people who came from the House proposal to thwart the impeachment of President. With 3 people from the government, the Democrats need only an additional two members of the Constitutional Court to declare the House against the president's dawaan tdak true.

The third obstacle, if the person is considered a member of the Constitutional Court was really independent until the error is assumed to be proved then the president of Democrats still can play again in the MPR. Once again, if alone, Democratic votes (21.29%) have not been enough to change the direction of the Assembly decision. However, with the addition of sound compatriots in the MPR F MCC (8.24%), F PAN (6.65%), F PPP (5.35%), F CLA (4.05%), the idea of ​​impeachment president of Ko-bener be an impossible idea. Their number reached almost half the total votes in the Assembly. While the support needed to achieve 2/3 of total members or a minimum of 66.7 percent.

Not to mention if Golkar continued to support the SBY-Boediono, the impeachment process looks more and more impossible.

V. Alibi for the success of impeachment

First, the enforcement of law and the constitution can not be implemented with only a text based on sound law without regard to enforcement. Major problems and this is reflected in the reality of law in Indonesia is currently used as a destination that is when the procedure has implications for the possibility that officials who happened to be innocent or guilty allegedly made the reason for the procedure as an excuse to perpetuate the post sehngga fragile foundations of law and justice are built in Indonesia . The right way, it should follow the procedure to realize the substance of the substantive fairness.

Thus, viewed from the aspect of constitutional law have the highest degree (supremacy), the basic consideration for the constitution-making body created by law or in the institutions where the establishment on behalf of the people, comes from the people. So that the force strength guaranteed by the people and should be implemented directly to the public for their interests.

Therefore, when people assess the heads of state or government have berhianat on people and committed serious crimes, the mandate may be revoked by the people.

Second, viewed from the aspect of moral constitution as a fundamental basis, so that the constitution is below. In other words, the constitution must not conflict with the universal values ​​and moral ethics. Therefore, if the rules conflict with the ethics of moral constitution, the constitution should be ruled out. The point is there a higher law above the constitution of the moral.

Third, the principle of equality before the law (equality before the law) as an element of state law, without discrimination. In principle, everyone should receive equal treatment before the law. Thus, regardless of background social status, occupation, religion, ethnicity, etc. of a person, when he was caught in a legal case, it must be treated according to regulations.

Conclusion of the party who saw the impossibility of impeachment against the head of state and government is the mechanism of impeachment of President and / or Vice President in Indonesia is a weak point of the 1945 Constitution as the rule of law was defeated by political practice.