The Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi / MK) has handed-down a decision which was read in open court as mandated by the Constitutional Court Law (Law No. 24 of 2003). The judicial review in this case involved Law No. 49 Prp of 1960 (Law 49Prp/1960) which was alleged to violate the constitutionally guaranteed rights of citizens to practice their chosen profession.

The Advocates Law (Law No. 18 of 2003) is proving to be a piece of legislation that is likely to be subject to ongoing applications for judicial review from a wide-ranging number of individuals and groups dissatisfied with the provisions contained within it. The Chief Justice of the court made a point of this fact in his oral questioning of the applicants in these cases. This decision, Case No. 014/PUU-IV/2006, concerning the existence of the 8 advocates' organizations noted in the Advocates Law. This is the first of 2 decisions handed-down by the Constitutional Court (See ILB 4/12/2006).

The Constitutional Court handed down another decision (015/PUU-IV/2006) on Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates (Advocates Law) on 30 November 2006 relating to an application for judicial review of Article 32(3). The application would have required the court to make a decision about the validity of PERADI (Perhimpunan Advokat Indonesia / Indonesian Advocates Association) as an ongoing entity. However, this would have required the court to find that the applicant had legal standing before providing any consideration to the substance of the claim.

The role of an internship for prospective advocates is a critical part of the practice learning puzzle in the post-Advocates Law legal environment, particular so when one considers that Law No. 18 of 2003 (Advocates Law) requires a 2-year internship to be completed. PERADI (the Indonesian Advocates' Association) had allowed a great deal of speculation and potential confusion to arise regarding who could undertake an internship and where internships were to be completed by not addressing this matter prior to the first round of advocates examinations or in the immediate aftermath of those examinations. However, the Regulation, No. 1 of 2006, dispels many of the myths that arose with respect to these concerns.

The management of matters relating to accountants and auditors has been delegated by the Minister of Finance (MoF) to the Secretary General of the Department of Finance based on the provisions contained in Ministerial Decision No. 607/KMK.01/2005. The purpose of the Regulation is to ensure greater administrative order and certainty.

The Advocates' Law (Law No. 18 of 2003) was the subject of further judicial review and the Constitutional Court (Court) handed down a decision which re-affirms an earlier decision with respect to how the Court frames a breach of a claimed constitutional right. The decision also highlights that the Court is intending to take a firm position on legal standing and as such this appears to be the mechanism of choice to ensure that the Court is only hearing and deciding matters where there are adjudicable constitutional issues to be resolved.

-

-

-