[ad_1]
Bisnis.com JAKARTA – The future of ojek online can be a momentous moment after the rejection by the Constitutional Court (MK) of the application for judicial review of the Road Traffic Act
The judges ruled that according to the philosophy of the LLAJ Act, road transport aims to support development and national integration in order to promote common prosperity. Therefore, as a national transport system, road transport must ensure safety and security.
The Assembly argues that section 47 (3) of the YLA Act is a legal standard that allows for performing social engineering work. This article is also considered not to be contrary to Article 27, paragraph 1, of the 1945 Constitution, as filed by the applicants who are motorcycle drivers online, because the article of the Constitution only concerns the post. The applicants' arguments declaring the exclusion of motorcyclists in Article 47 paragraph 3 of the LLAJ Act contrary to Article 27 (1) of the 1945 Constitution are unreasonable in law
"Article 47 paragraph 3 of the LLAJ protection law to every citizen when using cargo (19659003) The Court did not turn a blind eye to the phenomenon of motorcycles, but it n & # 39; 39 has nothing to do with the constitutional or unconstitutional norms of Article 47 (3) of the LLAJ Act, as when the online application that provides ojek services is not available or available as it is today, motorcycle taxis continue to operate without interruption by the existence of article 47 paragraph 3 of the LLAJ Act
Prior to this decision, the Constitutional Court declared that 39: a certain tax
Article 151 of the Road Traffic Act No. 22/2009 and transport (LLAJ Law) clbadifies the transport of persons with public motor vehicles not covering the road covering four types, namely (a) the transportation of persons by taxi, (b) the transport of persons for a specific purpose (d) the transport of persons in certain areas.
Constitutional Justice Aswanto stated that taxi applications can be included in the category of taxis as well as in the transportation of persons with a specific purpose. According to him, an online taxi is the same as a conventional taxi since both have similar business models.
Taxi applications, he continues, can also be clbadified as transportation for a specific purpose because they serve as door to door. Thus, an online taxi does not need to be clbadified as a separate public transport of the four types of vehicles.
"Taxi applications are not the type of transport, but how to order transportation services.Not a distinct type of transport people, so it has to be organized separately," he said while reading Examination of the decision No. MK. 97 / PUU-XV / 2017.
Five drivers of pbadenger cars, coaches and cars have asked the Court to complete Article 151 letter to LLAJ by the expression "technological applications based on taxis". The article is deemed to not accommodate taxis online because the newly "taxi" entered a category of public transport services with public vehicles are not in the path.
The applicant considers that the article does not support taxi applications currently under development in the country. They argue that the lack of legal umbrella for online transportation no longer guarantees the constitutional right of citizens to get work.
Aswanto stated that the Constitutional Court can not accept the petitioner's request to declare section 151a of the LLAJ Act unconstitutional. Because the clause does not indicate the existence of multiple interpretations or contradictions with other norms that compel the Constitutional Court to establish new norms conditionally
[ad_2]
Source link
