Several feminists and NGOs harvest their struggle. Constitutional Court granted parts of the petition of judicial review on UU MD3 about women representative in House (DPR) chairs.  

“Granting parts of the petition from the Plaintiff,” Chief Justice Hamdan Zoelva recited the verdict at MK Plenary room in Jakarta, Monday (9/29).   

Therefore, pleaded Articles, namely Article 97 verse (2), Article 104 verse (2), Article 109 verse (2), Article 109 verse (2), Article 115 verse (2), Article 121 verse (2), Article 152 (2), and Article 158 verse (2) UU MD3 are declared opposing 1945 Constitution and non-binding as long as not been added phrase “prioritizing women representatives according to members amount in each fraction”. By the ruling, MK enhanced women threshold to occupy DPR chairs.

In its consideration, affirmative action towards women representatives has been induced as political policy as an effort to strive equal opportunity to particular citizen group. “The lawmaker in every level must emit equalizing regulations to put those who are less favor level with the more favorable ones,” Aswanto said. The regulation is a reflection of spirit conveyed in Article 28H verse (2) 1945 Constitution

Moreover, women representative to occupy DPR chairs are special treatment and guaranteed by the Constitution. The abolishment of Articles which regulate the norm is a bolishment for the law certainty as well. Such removal may lead to further degradation of other affirmative action, committed by other institutions. Besides, affirmative action of women representatives accounted in Act 27/2009, had been reckoned as legal norms. “To the Court, such policy (abolishment), is policy that harms justice principle. Therefore, the request is reasonable,” Justice Patrialis Akbar said.

Meanwhile for the petitum which asked MK to add phrase “mandatory to fulfill women representatives limit”, MK has stated that phrase “concerning” will be diverted to “prioritizing”, so the mandate will be more binding.(Lulu Hanifah/kun)