Rule on Notary Retirement Age is Constitutional
Image

Principal petitioner Anthony Saga Widjaja (right), listening to decision Number 52/PUU-VIII/2010 of judicial review of Law Number 30 Year 2004 concerning Notary Position (the Notary Position Law) pronounced by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD accompanied by six Constitutional Justices, Friday (15/10).


Jakarta, MKOnline – The Constitutional Court decided to reject petition for the judicial review of Law Number 30 Year 2004 concerning Notary Position (the Notary Position Law) in its entirety. This was the injunction of decision Number 52/PUU-VIII/2010 as pronounced by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Moh. Mahfud MD, accompanied by six constitutional justices, Friday (15/10), at the Plenary Court Room of the Constitutional Court. The case was petitioned by Anthony Saga Widjaja.

In the principal issue of his petition, the Petitioner questioned the provisions on the retirement age of a notary which pursuant to Article 8 paragraph (1) sub-paragraph b and Article 8 paragraph (2) of the Notary Position Law, namely 65 years old and may be extended for two years, namely 67 years old, at the maximum. The Petitioner considered these provisions to be contradictory to Article 27 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution and Article 28A of the 1945 Constitution. According to the Petitioner, insofar as a person is still mentally and physically healthy, his/her term of office may still be extended so that he/she could still make a living from his profession.

In its opinion, the Court explained that the age of retirement or the termination of the term of office for each institution has been set forth in laws and regulation. A Constitutional Justice, pursuant to Law Number 24 Year 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court would be dismissed if his 5-year term of office had ended and he may be re-elected only once. “A Supreme Judge, pursuant to Law Number 5 Year 2004 concerning Amendment To Law Number 14 Year 1985 concerning the Supreme Court shall retire after reaching the age of 65 and may be extended for two years, namely at the maximum of 67 years of age. Subsequently Law Number 3 Year 2009 concerning Second Amendment To Law Number 14 Year 1985 concerning the Supreme Court, specifies that a Supreme Judge shall retire at the age of 70,” said one of the constitutional justices.

In addition, the retirement age of a Public Prosecutor in Law Number 5 Year 1991 concerning Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Indonesia (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1991 Number 59, Article 12 sub-article c is specified as follows: “c. Has reached the age of 58 (fifty-eight) and 60 (sixty) for the Head of Provincial Public Prosecutor’s Office and Deputy Head of Provincial Public Prosecutor’s Office or positions considered equal to Head of Provincial Public Prosecutor’s Office and Deputy Head of Provincial Public Prosecutor’s Office”. Subsequently, the retirement age of a prosecutor was amended by legislators. Pursuant to Article 12 sub-paragraph c of Law Number 16 Year 2004 concerning Public Prosecutor’s Office of the Republic of Indonesia, the retirement age of a Prosecutor shall be 62 (sixty-two) years old. 

“In reference to the rules considered above, the Court concluded that the stipulation of legislators on the limit of retirement age of an official is an open legal policy in which any retirement age stipulated may not be regarded as an unconstitutional provision. The Court considered that the issue of retirement age of an official is the domain of legislative review, as such the amendment to the retirement age of Supreme Judges from 65 or 67 to 70 or the retirement age of Public Prosecutors from 58 or 60 to 62 considered above, is not the domain of judicial review,” one of the constitutional justices explained.

In the conclusion pronounced by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Moh. Mahfud MD, the Court concluded that the Petitioner has a legal standing to act as Petitioner in this case. “The Petitioner’s petition has no legal grounds,” he said. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh)


Friday, October 15, 2010 | 12:56 WIB 216