Application of Review on Act 11/1992 on the Pension Fund can not be accepted by the Constitutional Court. "Court has no authority to examine, hear and decide upon the a quo act," said Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD, in a trial verdict, Thursday (13/10).

Court’s opinion, Article 27 paragraph (1) Pension Fund Act did not regulate the pension benefits, as questioned by the Petitioners. In this case, the applicant wants the pension benefits based on length of employment, the amount of base salary and rank. So it is not as contained in the Letter of the Director of PT Telkom Number 485/PS.560/SDM-30/2004, dated June 30, 2004, which is the implementation of Article 27 paragraph (1) of the Pension Fund.

"Therefore the question of the Petitioners is Managing Director of SK that are not a law then the Court has no authority to examine, hear and decide upon the a quo," said the Court.

Acting as the Petitioner in this case 25/PUU-IX/2011 number is Hasanuddin shahib, Kusnendar Atmosukarto, and Suharto. The three of them are retired PT. Telkom. They tested the Article 27 paragraph (1) of the Pension Fund. This article states, "Participants who retire at normal retirement age or later, are entitled to pension benefits are calculated based on the pension formula that applies to membership until retirement".

Previously, according to the Petitioners, they have been harmed by a Letter of Managing Director. PT. Telkom dated June 30, 2004 which makes the formulation of a pension benefit by dividing the pension recipients into three groups with each other there is a very flashy. "So that created the conditions for discrimination and inequality among pensioners in particular who retired prior to August 2000," said Applicant.

In addition, according to the Petitioners, the article has also been given opportunities and potentially arbitrary and greed. They concluded, at least contrary to the provisions of Article 28I paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. (Dodi / mh/Yazid.tr)