Suharto as Principal Petitioner delivering the petition revision for the judicial review of Law on Teachers and Lecturers on Monday (20/11) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

Suharto delivered revision in the second hearing of judicial review of Law No. 14/2005 on Teachers and Lecturers on Monday (20/11) afternoon. The hearing of Case No. 87/PUU-XV/2017 was led by Constitutional Justice Aswanto in the presence of Constitutional Justices Manahan M.P. Sitompul and Suhartoyo.

The Petitioner, who was not represented by an attorney, explained that he had revised the petition. The revision is related to the petition argument. “Even though the petition and its revision seem to have differed, in essence they have the same philosophy, that it is an objective reality. Similarly, [I] read in the media that in Bonn there are thousands of people questioning climate change,” Suharto explained.

Meanwhile, in Indonesia, Suharto continued, the read an opinion in the media about nationalist actions. “It seems to be different, global international problems and national problems of our country. However, in [my] opinion, the philosophy in essence is at the root of the problem. It comes down to one point. That’s the condition in our country,” Suharto said.

The petitum explains the argument that Article 48 paragraph (3) of the Teachers and Lecturers Law is contrary to the 1994 Constitution. The article reads, “The requirement to occupy an academic professorship is the academic qualification of a doctorate."

“In [my] opinion, there needs to be a more detailed elaboration by the Constitutional Court. Therefore, there will not be double, triple, even multiple interpretations, which could lead to misunderstanding. The understanding could be in the form of communication inefficiency, management inefficiency, democracy inefficiency, and in the end system inefficiency,” said Suharto.

Suharto said that the inefficiency in the end harmed many parties, not only individuals, but lecturers who have the same interest. “However, the larger impact concerns the democracy in the country. The implication is larger because democracy issues in the country will have a very large impact on the global life. I think that’s all, Your Honor,” Suharto added.

The Petitioner is a lecturer at the Faculty of Engineering of Brawijaya University, Malang; he reviews Article 48 paragraph (3) of the a quo law. He has worked for almost 30 years and is harmed due to the enactment of Article 48 paragraph (3) of the a quo law, because he cannot be promoted. Suharto said that according to studies, position promotion or position advancement has very wide implications on the welfare of lecturers. In other words, he said, the urgency of the Law on Teachers and Lecturers is that the word “qualification” without an official translation, especially from a competent party, in this case the Constitutional Court, will lead to multiple interpretations. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)