Chairman of the hearing, Anwar Usman, accompanied by Justices I Dewa Gede Palguna and Aswanto after judicial review hearing of Law No. 16/2017 on Mass Organizations (Ormas Law), Tuesday (27/2) at the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

Two advocates who reviewed Law No. 16/2017 on Mass Organizations (Ormas Law) withdrew their petition. In the second session held on Tuesday (27/2), Eggy Sudjana and Damai Hari Lubis, represented by Benny Haris Nainggolan, withdrew their petition on the grounds that the two Petitioners could not continue.

"One of the Petitioners was hospitalized yesterday due to a heart attack; Petitioner II is performing umroh. As one of his legal counsels, I declare this case withdrawn," he said before the Panel of Justices led by Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Anwar Usman.

Responding to the petition withdrawal, Justice Anwar asked the Petitioners to submit a written request for petition withdrawal. He also explained that the withdrawal would be submitted at the Judges\' Deliberation Meeting (RPH).

Tthe Petitioners reviewed Article 59 paragraph (4) letter c, Article 62 paragraph (3), Article 80A, and Article 82A paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Ormas Law. They argued that the articles being reviewed are multi-interpretive and subject to subjective interpretation by the government. For example, in Article 59 paragraph (4) letter c of the Ormas Law, Pancasila can be interpreted subjectively and unilaterally by the government. Article 62 paragraph (3) and Article 80A of the Ormas Law do not allow mass organizations that are to be dissolved a chance to defend themselves. Mass organizations should be given space for defense through legal process. To that end, the Petitioner requested the Panel of Constitutional Justices to revoke the enforcement of those articles. (ARS/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)