Sidang Perkara Nomor 97/PUU-XXII/2024. Senin, 30 September 2024.

Summary

The Constitutional Court session begins with formal introductions from the parties involved, including representatives from the petitioner, the government, and related organizations like Basnas and Muhammadiyah's Lembaga Zakat. The hearing, addressing a case about the management of zakat (Case No. 97/PUU/2024), is delayed as both the President and the DPR requested more time to prepare their statements. The court announces the next hearing date and addresses administrative changes within the petitioner's organization. The session concludes with a formal closing and a rescheduled hearing date.

Takeaways

• ⚖️ The court session opens with the Constitutional Court judges entering the courtroom and the session is declared open to the public.
• 📝 The case being heard is number 97/PUU-Gar 22 Romawi/2024, and the session starts by introducing the attendees for the petitioner and the government.
• 👨‍⚖️ The petitioner’s representatives include Sabarudin, Re Haranto, and Mahend Putra, with other petitioners attending online.
• 👥 The government representatives include officials from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the Ministry of Religious Affairs, notably Prof. Kamaruddin Ma and other high-ranking officials.
• 💼 The BASNAS (National Zakat Agency) is represented by its chairman, Nur Ahmad, along with other key figures, while representatives from LASISMU (a Muhammadiyah charity organization) were delayed.
• 📅 The session was initially scheduled to hear statements from the President and the House of Representatives (DPR), but both requested rescheduling.
• 📜 The President's office requested a 14-day postponement to prepare a statement regarding the judicial review of the 2011 Zakat Management Law.
• 📢 The court announces that the next session will be held on Thursday, October 17, 2024, at 1:30 PM, with the agenda to hear statements from the President and the DPR.
• 🔄 The petitioner informs the court of a change in leadership within their organization, but the structure of the organization remains intact.
• 🚪 The session is adjourned, and the next case to be heard is scheduled for 2:00 PM, involving case number 130/PUU-Gar 22 Romawi.

Q & A

What was the main focus of the court hearing in the script?

The main focus of the court hearing was the judicial review of Law No. 23 of 2011 concerning the management of zakat, under case number 97/PUU/2024.

Who represented the petitioner in the court hearing?

The petitioner was represented by Sabarudin, Re Haranto, and Mahend Putra, with the principal of the petitioner attending the session online.

What government ministries were involved in the hearing?

The Ministry of Law and Human Rights and the Ministry of Religious Affairs were involved in the hearing, represented by Erni Haris from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, and Prof. Dr. Kamaruddin from the Ministry of Religious Affairs.

Which zakat-related organizations were present at the hearing?

BASNAS (National Zakat Agency) and LAZISMU (Zakat, Infak, and Sedekah Institution for Muhammadiyah) were present. Representatives from BASNAS included Nur Ahmad and Muhammad Makdum, while LAZISMU was represented by Muhammad Ihsan Tanjung and others.

What was the issue with the attendance of DPR and the President’s representatives?

Both the DPR (House of Representatives) and the President’s representatives were unable to attend the hearing. The DPR requested a rescheduled date, and the President's representatives asked for more time to prepare their statement.

When was the next hearing scheduled?

The next hearing was scheduled for Thursday, October 17, 2024, at 13:30, with the agenda of hearing statements from the DPR and the President.

What reason did the President's representatives give for requesting a postponement?

The President's representatives requested a postponement because they needed more time to coordinate and prepare a substantial statement related to the judicial review of the law on zakat.

What organizational change was mentioned during the hearing?

There was a mention of a change in the leadership of the second petitioner’s organization, although the organization itself remained the same.

What procedural action was taken regarding the absence of DPR and the President’s representatives?

The court decided to reschedule the hearing and summoned both the DPR and the President’s representatives to present their statements at the next session.

What was the court's closing statement regarding the hearing?

The court stated that all parties, including the petitioners and relevant organizations, should prepare for the next hearing and attend without needing another summons, as the schedule was set for October 17, 2024.