Principal Petitioner, Widodo Edy Budianto a former civil servant (PNS) at pada Tegal Port Administrator Office questioning his pension right after being dismissed without respect, Wednesday (9/2/2011)
Jakarta, MK Online - Widodo Edy Budianto was again present at the hearing of the Constitutional Court (The Court) on Wednesday (9/2/2011) to undergo the continuation of the judicial review trial on the Employee Pension Rights Act. He argued about his right after being laid off with no respect from Tegal Port Administration Office. The Petitioner admitted upon his dismissal without respect, he was turning 50 years old with 24 years of service.
Widodo is examined the norms in Article 9 paragraph (1) letter a Act No. 11/1969 about The Employee Retirement and Pension for Employee’s Widow/Widower which stated that “Employees who are dismissed with honor as a public servant is entitled to receive employee pension, if he was at the time of dismissal as a public servant has reached the age of at least 50 years and had at least 20 years of service”. According to him, the article 9 paragraph (1) letter a of Act No. 11/1969 is contradicting to the Article 27 paragraph (1) and (2), Article 28A, Article 28D paragraph (1) and (2), Article 28G paragraph (1), Article 28H paragraph (1) and (2), Article 28I paragraph (1) and (2), and also article 28I paragraph(4) and (5) of the 1945 Constitution.
The session for case No. 7/PUU-IX/2011 was conducted by the Panel Judge of Achmad Sodiki (as a Panel Chairman), Muhammad Alim dan Hamdan Zoelva. In the trial with the agenda of examining improved Petition, Widodo explained some arguments behind his petition.
First, there was no provision in any laws or goverment regulations (PP) regarding the dissmisal of civil servants, either with or without respect because of breaking the rules (discipline). Widodo said that “there is no provision which stated that the entire civil servants is dissmised or have to dissmised with respect or with no respect as a civil servants due to absences or being indisciplinary”.
Second, regarding to the decree of The Minister of Transportation about his dismissal, it is based on PP 30/1980. “I was entangled with PP 30/1980” said Widodo. According to PP 30 of 1980, there was no article on the impotition of sanctions; for both with/ without respect. “Therefore the decree of the Minister of Transportation has no legal ground”, he continued.
After bringing out all the arguments, Widodo conveyed the improvement of his petition. First, the decree for his dismissal without respect violates the 1945 Constitution and Pancasila (the five principles). Widodo stated “It is because the Petitioner do not commit any crimes related to his position and did not do any misappropriation to the ideology of Pancasila, the 1945 constitution and do not involved in any activities against the State or Government”.
According to Widodo, he should have been temporarily suspended and deserved waiting honorarium. Then after he reached age of 56 and had working period of 10 years, thus he had a right to get his pension. “Because the Petitioner has been working for 13 years and have exceeded the retirement age which established in Constitution No. 8/1974 and enhanced by the Goverment regulation No. 32/1979 article 18”, Widodo said.
In the refinement of the petition, Widodo asked the Court to declare his dissmisal without respect decree, that is Decree No. 18/KT 602/PHB/1998 enhanced with No. 399/2001 could not be executed. “The Decree should have given him a dismissal with respect and entitled to pension as set out in Act No. 8 of 1974 on the Points on Civil Service or the State Gazette Year 1974 No. 55 in addtition to the State Gazette No. 3041 and enhanced by the Government Regulation No. 32 of 1979 article 18, as the replacement, "Widodo added. (Nur Rosihin Ana/mh/Intan)
Monday, February 14, 2011 | 13:55 WIB 341