Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami ARI
Delegation of AACC Member States. Photo: ARI
The 3rd congress of the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions (AACC) was officially opened by the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Mr. Joko Widodo, on Thursday, 11 August 2016. The congress, which has already been underway for a full week, has most recently focused on issues surrounding the promotion and protection of the constitutional rights of member states’ citizens.
During his speech, President Joko Widodo pointed out the importance of the various issues discussed during the congress in relation to Indonesia and the world beyond. “Every state is obliged to enforce and guarantee the constitutional rights of its citizens,” explained Mr. Widodo.
Following the official opening of the AACC Congress by the President, AACC member states moved on to a discussion of how to protect constitutional rights within their own borders.
The discussion got underway with a few remarks from the former President of the Constitutional Court of Korea, Mr. Kang-Kook Lee. Mr. Lee stressed the importance of protecting constitutional rights across Asia.
“Freedom, human rights, equality and justice for Asians should be guaranteed to as great an extent as possible. This will ensure that we will be able to make a greater contribution to the development of democracy and the rule of law across Asia and the world as a whole, and see us becoming a symbol of trust and hope for the people of Asia and the world beyond,” explained Mr. Lee.
Each member state, including Indonesia, Korea, and Thailand, then took it in turns to explain the various methods employed by their constitutional courts.
Indonesia, which was being represented by Mr. Patrialis Akbar, a judge at the Constitutional Court of Indonesia, stated that the Constitutional Court had resolved the various national problems which had been dogging the court’s role as the guardian of the Indonesian constitution.
“The Court offers protection to citizens whose rights are discriminated against and who are generally ignored during the day-to-day life of the nation,” Mr. Akbar stated. Mr. Akbar then went on to explain the various methods which are now being employed to protect citizen’s rights, and which are being implemented as a result of a recent landmark decision. The decision in question encompasses a broad swathe of national life, including politics, socio-cultural factors and the economy.
“The landmark decision has introduced a number of significant changes to the country's constitutional system. For example, it prioritizes the protection of citizens’ constitutional rights, as guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution, and also creates a new legal condition which was not previously regulated by the Constitution in a bid to achieve greater legal certainty,” Mr. Akbar asserted.
Meanwhile, Mr. Insung Lee, acting as judge of the Constitutional Court of Korea, discussed the protection of constitutional rights in his country in relation to the implementation of the concept of Constitutional Complaints. This became a particular point of interest during the meeting, as the Constitutional Court of Indonesia does not currently have the authority to decide on cases relating to Constitutional Complaints.
“The Constitutional Court Act of Korea sets out two types of Constitutional Complaints. Firstly comes Complaint as Remedy Rights, which is a complaint brought by any person who claims that his/her constitutional rights have been violated by an exercise of governmental power. Secondly there is Constitutional Complaint as Constitutional Review of Statutes, and this is for any individual who files a motion at an ordinary court requesting a review of a given statute by the Constitutional Court, but who sees their motion subsequently being denied. In this case, an individual may directly file a Constitutional Complaint with the Constitutional Court,” Mr. Insung Lee explained.
This second practice of Constitutional Complaints is unique to the Korean judicial system and is rarely found in other countries. This is owing to the fact that, while it is referred to as Constitutional Complaint, it is in fact similar in nature to a constitutional review of statutes (or judicial review).
The Korean Constitutional Complaint system is frequently used by the Korean people, due to the fact that the Korean Constitutional Court has lowered the threshold for Constitutional Complaints through a process of proactive interpretation.
“It is true that, when compared with Korea, Indonesia faces a greater number of legal obstacles as regards the introduction of a Constitutional Complaint mechanism, however I believe that the Indonesian Constitutional Court will be able to play an important role in overcoming such setbacks and will ultimately give top priority to the protection of people’s fundamental rights,” Mr. Insung Lee asserted.
The third member to address the discussion was the Constitutional Court of Thailand, which was being represented by Mr. Nurak Marpraneet. Mr. Marpraneet explained that the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand guaranteed the rights and liberties of citizens in line with the universal standards set out by the United Nations, including the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Mr. Marpraneet further explained that rights recognized by the Constitution or by a decision of the Constitutional Court were protected in line with the enactment application and interpretation of all laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Court of Thailand has a clear mission to promote and protect civil rights as they relate to human dignity, human rights, equality and anti-discrimination measures.
“The Constitutional Court of Thailand is one of the most important organizations in the country and has a role to play and a serious contribution to make as regards the promotion and protection of our citizens’ constitutional rights,” he asserted.
Mr. Marpraneet also emphasized several of the important roles played by the Constitutional Court, including its role in guaranteeing civil-rights security, enhancing the quality of civil life in terms of welfare and property, improving civil conditions based upon the rule of law and constitutionality, and the laying of foundations for peaceful and fraternal relationships among the country's citizens, as well as between citizens and the state.
As background, the Constitutional Court of Thailand was responsible for issuing a decision impeaching its Prime Minister, Mr. Samak Sundaravej. Article 267 of the Thai Constitution prohibits the prime minister from running any business that generates a profit, as well as from being employed by any other employer. When Mr. Sundaravej was proven guilty, Mr. Chat Chonlaworn, acting as the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of Thailand, issued a decision stating that the position of Mr. Sundaravej as a prime minister had officially ended.
At the time of writing, several other member states, including Malaysia, Russia, Azerbaijan, had still to deliver their presentations regarding the practice of the constitutional courts in their respective countries in relation to the protection of their citizens’ constitutional rights. Broadly speaking however, the discussion demonstrated how different countries have their own methods of promoting and protecting the constitutional rights of their citizens and have developed systems which are suited to their different needs and situations.
(hs/sp)
ARI
Delegation of AACC Member States. Photo: ARI
The 3rd congress of the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions (AACC) was officially opened by the President of the Republic of Indonesia, Mr. Joko Widodo, on Thursday, 11 August 2016. The congress, which has already been underway for a full week, has most recently focused on issues surrounding the promotion and protection of the constitutional rights of member states’ citizens.
During his speech, President Joko Widodo pointed out the importance of the various issues discussed during the congress in relation to Indonesia and the world beyond. “Every state is obliged to enforce and guarantee the constitutional rights of its citizens,” explained Mr. Widodo.
Following the official opening of the AACC Congress by the President, AACC member states moved on to a discussion of how to protect constitutional rights within their own borders.
The discussion got underway with a few remarks from the former President of the Constitutional Court of Korea, Mr. Kang-Kook Lee. Mr. Lee stressed the importance of protecting constitutional rights across Asia.
“Freedom, human rights, equality and justice for Asians should be guaranteed to as great an extent as possible. This will ensure that we will be able to make a greater contribution to the development of democracy and the rule of law across Asia and the world as a whole, and see us becoming a symbol of trust and hope for the people of Asia and the world beyond,” explained Mr. Lee.
Each member state, including Indonesia, Korea, and Thailand, then took it in turns to explain the various methods employed by their constitutional courts.
Indonesia, which was being represented by Mr. Patrialis Akbar, a judge at the Constitutional Court of Indonesia, stated that the Constitutional Court had resolved the various national problems which had been dogging the court’s role as the guardian of the Indonesian constitution.
“The Court offers protection to citizens whose rights are discriminated against and who are generally ignored during the day-to-day life of the nation,” Mr. Akbar stated. Mr. Akbar then went on to explain the various methods which are now being employed to protect citizen’s rights, and which are being implemented as a result of a recent landmark decision. The decision in question encompasses a broad swathe of national life, including politics, socio-cultural factors and the economy.
“The landmark decision has introduced a number of significant changes to the country's constitutional system. For example, it prioritizes the protection of citizens’ constitutional rights, as guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution, and also creates a new legal condition which was not previously regulated by the Constitution in a bid to achieve greater legal certainty,” Mr. Akbar asserted.
Meanwhile, Mr. Insung Lee, acting as judge of the Constitutional Court of Korea, discussed the protection of constitutional rights in his country in relation to the implementation of the concept of Constitutional Complaints. This became a particular point of interest during the meeting, as the Constitutional Court of Indonesia does not currently have the authority to decide on cases relating to Constitutional Complaints.
“The Constitutional Court Act of Korea sets out two types of Constitutional Complaints. Firstly comes Complaint as Remedy Rights, which is a complaint brought by any person who claims that his/her constitutional rights have been violated by an exercise of governmental power. Secondly there is Constitutional Complaint as Constitutional Review of Statutes, and this is for any individual who files a motion at an ordinary court requesting a review of a given statute by the Constitutional Court, but who sees their motion subsequently being denied. In this case, an individual may directly file a Constitutional Complaint with the Constitutional Court,” Mr. Insung Lee explained.
This second practice of Constitutional Complaints is unique to the Korean judicial system and is rarely found in other countries. This is owing to the fact that, while it is referred to as Constitutional Complaint, it is in fact similar in nature to a constitutional review of statutes (or judicial review).
The Korean Constitutional Complaint system is frequently used by the Korean people, due to the fact that the Korean Constitutional Court has lowered the threshold for Constitutional Complaints through a process of proactive interpretation.
“It is true that, when compared with Korea, Indonesia faces a greater number of legal obstacles as regards the introduction of a Constitutional Complaint mechanism, however I believe that the Indonesian Constitutional Court will be able to play an important role in overcoming such setbacks and will ultimately give top priority to the protection of people’s fundamental rights,” Mr. Insung Lee asserted.
The third member to address the discussion was the Constitutional Court of Thailand, which was being represented by Mr. Nurak Marpraneet. Mr. Marpraneet explained that the Constitution of the Kingdom of Thailand guaranteed the rights and liberties of citizens in line with the universal standards set out by the United Nations, including the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights and International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights.
Mr. Marpraneet further explained that rights recognized by the Constitution or by a decision of the Constitutional Court were protected in line with the enactment application and interpretation of all laws. Therefore, the Constitutional Court of Thailand has a clear mission to promote and protect civil rights as they relate to human dignity, human rights, equality and anti-discrimination measures.
“The Constitutional Court of Thailand is one of the most important organizations in the country and has a role to play and a serious contribution to make as regards the promotion and protection of our citizens’ constitutional rights,” he asserted.
Mr. Marpraneet also emphasized several of the important roles played by the Constitutional Court, including its role in guaranteeing civil-rights security, enhancing the quality of civil life in terms of welfare and property, improving civil conditions based upon the rule of law and constitutionality, and the laying of foundations for peaceful and fraternal relationships among the country's citizens, as well as between citizens and the state.
As background, the Constitutional Court of Thailand was responsible for issuing a decision impeaching its Prime Minister, Mr. Samak Sundaravej. Article 267 of the Thai Constitution prohibits the prime minister from running any business that generates a profit, as well as from being employed by any other employer. When Mr. Sundaravej was proven guilty, Mr. Chat Chonlaworn, acting as the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court of Thailand, issued a decision stating that the position of Mr. Sundaravej as a prime minister had officially ended.
At the time of writing, several other member states, including Malaysia, Russia, Azerbaijan, had still to deliver their presentations regarding the practice of the constitutional courts in their respective countries in relation to the protection of their citizens’ constitutional rights. Broadly speaking however, the discussion demonstrated how different countries have their own methods of promoting and protecting the constitutional rights of their citizens and have developed systems which are suited to their different needs and situations.
(hs/sp)