Due to the pro and cons polemics around the issue of pornography, an act was
brought about, i.e., the Act number 44 of 2008 on Pornography, which was seemingly
served as the answer to end that ongoing polemics. This was seen to be an invalid
democracy concerning the debates were not ended yet, but the draft of the act on
pornography was soon ratified and immediately imposed. The rationale of debates
rooted in the assumption of the existing patriarchal culture saw that this pornography
act would create such a worsening societal condition of women in particular, socially
and legally. This means that the implication gives the contrary result in that there
will be no reassurance of legal protection for women in particular and people in
general who would be more discriminated than the previous condition. This condition
had become the background of some groups within society in refusing the
Pornography Act by proposing an appeal for a judicial review to the Supreme Court
of Constitution (MK). LBH APIK (Law Firm of Indonesian Women Association for
Justice) was one of the organizations, which proposed that judicial review. It was one
of organization that persuaded people not to stop criticizing the act since it was
proposed as draft.
The objective of this research was to find out how far was the role of LBH
APIK Jakarta in its involvement in pornography act’s judicial review process. This
research applied library research methodology, combined with some first-hand
information through interviews in qualitative tradition. Most data were gathered from
books, journals, handbook, papers, internet sources and dictionary.
This research concludes that LBH APIK proposed arguments for proposing
that judicial review by testing articles stated in the act that contradicts the principals
of 1945 Constitution such as: Article 1 section 1; Article 4 No 1 and 2; Article 10;
Article 20; and Article 23. In addition, the implementation of the Pornography Act
resulted in the increasing discriminatory acts towards women in particular. Among
other examples is the absence of specific procedure of law.