Constitutionality of Freedom of Association Notary Organization in Indonesia

Abstract

This research was motivated by the Law Test to the Constitutional Court, namely the test of the Notary Office Law (UUJN), especially Article 82 regarding Notary Organizations, the petitioners asked for a quo test because the provision has limited the freedom of association for Notaries to form Notary professional organizations. This restriction is considered to have violated the human rights of Notaries, especially the rights to association, assembly, and expression of opinions as the constitutional guarantee referred to is affirmed in the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945 (UUD 1945), The existence of the Indonesian Notary Association (INI) as the only Notary professional organization was further strengthened after passing constitutional review in the Constitutional Court. The Constitutional Judge in Constitutional Court Decision Number 009-014 / PUU-III / 2005 and reaffirmed by Constitutional Court Decision Number 63 / PUU-XII / 2014 that the Constitutional Court decision is an organization of the Indonesian Notary Association that is recognized for its existence, but also that its ruling that dissolves organizations other than the Indonesian Notary Association, thus the existence of INI as the only single notary organization regulated in the UUJN does not contradict the 1945 Constitution. Instead of being impressed as an attempt to ignore the value of Human Rights (HAM), Freedom in Notary organizations is only based on ethical freedom which refers to the good or bad of an action measured by the extent to which it provides protection for freedom and expansion of capabilities, which in this case is the capability in carrying out its profession as a Notary and Single Container is a must.