The Principal Applicant Rochmadi Sularsono attended the hearing on Act of Civil State Officials (Aparatur Sipil Negara –ASN) on Wednesday March 4, at Panel Session Room (Ruang Sidang Panel), the Constitutional Court Building (Gedung Mahkamah Konstitusi –MK)

The Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi –MK) held initial judicial review on Act No. 5 Year 2014 of Civil State Officials (Aparatur Sipil Negara –ASN), scheduled on the preliminary hearing on Wednesday March 4, at Panel Session Room 4^th Floor, MK Building. The case registered on No.27/PUU-XIII/2015 is filed by Rochmadi Sularsono who is a Ponorogo Regency Civil Servant. Unaccompanied with his lawyer, Rochmadi in his petition states that his constitutional rights had been impaired by the implementation of several Articles on a quo Act.      

“The Applicant impaired his constitutionality rights relate with the release on Article 139, Article136, and then Article 66 (2). It relates with the word ‘will’ and ‘civil servant’ without the inclusion of contract-based Government Employees (Pegawai Pemerintah Perjanjian Kerja –PPPK), then Article 2 Letter a that consists of many articles,” explained Rochmadi in front of judge panel led by Constitutional Judge Aswanto. Overall, the Applicant on his petitum pledges to the panel to state this following: Article 6 Letter a, Article 2 Letter a, Article 61, Article 66 (2), Article 136, Article 137, and Article 139; do not have legal binding as opposed to the norm on the 1945 Constitution (Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 –UUD 1945)    

After hearing the petition, Constitutional Judge Maria Farida Indarti gives advice to the Applicant concerned with technical aspect of petition writing which causes obscurity on the intention of it. “Written Article 2 J non discrimination, what is the intention of it Sir? If the previous statements said on letter a Article 2 parentheses legal certainty, it should be written Article 2 Letter a probably,” Maria Farida explained.

Moreover, Maria Farida highlights the petitum filed by the Applicant. According to Maria Farida, the petitum shall be stated the article that considered opposed with the 1945 Constitution and then stated that it has no legal binding. “So, it shall states Article 137 Act of Civil State Officials (Undang-Undang ASN) is opposed with the 1945 Constitution, thereafter it has no legal binding,” said her when gave the petitum example to the Applicant. 

Then, according to Maria Farida, when the petition filed by the Applicant is not qualified and cannot convince the judges on the issues in it, the petition will be useless.

The technical writing issue is also highlighted by Constitutional Judge Anwar Usman. According to Anwar, this petitum is only requires to note the article that contrary to the 1945 Constitution. Meanwhile Constitutional Judge Aswanto briefly clarifies the petitum. According to Aswanto, the petition that written long enough was lead to confusion and directionless, so it was not clear what was filed in the petition. Therefore, Aswanto advised the Applicant to read the proceedings in MK that noted on Act of Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi –MK) and MK Rules. Moreover, Aswanto also clarified constitutional loss suffered by the Applicant because it was not clearly described on the petition. “Well, what you are arguing is on daily-based contract workers (honorer) loss, while you are civil servant, so where is your loss” said him. Aswanto later advised him to elaborate clearly on constitutional loss he suffered. (Triya IR / Prasetyo Adi N)