---

The first trial of judicial review of Article 60 of Law No. 39 Year 2004 on the Placement and Protection of Indonesian Workers Abroad was held on Wednesday (23/1) at the Panel Session Court. The case was registered by the Registrar of the Court to the number 5/PUU-XI/2013.

Petitioner is Imam Adrongi which is a family of Siti Nurkhasanah as an Indonesian Workers in Riyadh. Through a lawyer, Iskandar Zulkarnaen, Petitioner revealed that the constitutional rights of the applicant’s family (Siti Nurkhasanah) harmed by the provisions of Article 60 Law on Protection of Migrant Workers.

"Due to the lack of clarity and the protection of rights to guarantee legal certainty that the applicant families and extend their own contracts have happened something unexpected is mentally shaken Petitioner and family without being rewarded by his employer, the applicant has to report to the local Department of Labor, but until now the applicant reports on condition that afflicts Siti Nurkhasanah not treated as his own to extend the contract," said Iskandar.

In fact, according to him, the Government and the House of Representatives has approved and ratified the Migrant Workers Protection Act. In addition, the lack of protection is not only experienced by the workers who are placed illegally. "Protection for legal migrant workers also make no guarantee that working abroad through the Company’s Private Placement of Indonesian Workers (PPTKIS) to be safe and protected," said Iskandar.

Weak assure the protection of migrant workers shows the inadequacy of the system of protection for workers stationed abroad. Thus, said Iskandar, placement workers abroad proved the opportunity for human trafficking (trafficking).

Furthermore Iskandar said that the main issue in this case because the protection of migrant workers basically ineffective protection system built by the government for this. Ineffective protection system has produced a long chain of problems of migrant workers, of which 80% of the chain is located in the country.

"The government should as executive placement Labour in Indonesia is required to provide protection from inside the country, in the country of destination to return to their homes in Indonesia as mandate by Article 6 of Law no. 39 in 2004," he said.

Therefore, continued Iskandar, Guarantee legal protection to Indonesian citizens who work abroad are the responsibility of the Government and PPTKIS should not be abolished by any provision because it is a constitutional right that has been granted by the 1945 Constitution.

"If the provisions of Article a quo declared not to have binding legal force, it will clarify the responsibilities of the state represented by the Government to guarantee legal protection for workers who extend themselves his employment agreement as set by Article 6, Article 77 and Article 80 of Law No. . 39 In 2004, "he said before the Panel of Judges of the Constitutional Court is headed by the Deputy Chief Justice Achmad Sodiki and were accompanied by Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi and Anwar Usman 

The Article 60 of the Law on Protection of workers who tested applicant reads, "In the case of an extension done by the workers in question, then the executor private placement workers are not responsible for the risks affecting workers in the extension agreement."

Furthermore, the Panel suggest improvements petition to the applicant. Sodiki requested that the applicant improve causal relationship between job applicants with tested laws. Because the issue is a constitutional right applicant family, the applicants while a farmer and not the workers.

In addition, Sodiki also asked the Petitioner to elaborate constitutional in more detail, especially about their own contract extension with a contract extension through labor brokers. Meanwhile, Fadlil Sumadi asked Petitioner wrote in his petition improve governance.

Next session, the agenda will be held after the petition repair fix Applicant petition. The applicant was given 14 days to fix it. (Utami Argawati / mh)

---