---

The Petitioners’ legal counsel, Ferdian Sutanto, following the judicial review of Law Number 22 of 2009 on Road Traffic and Land Transportation, Thursday (31/5) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

The petition for judicial review of Law No. 22/2009 on Road Traffic and Land Transportation (LLAJ Law) submitted by Etty Afiyati Hentihu and four other petitioners who are drivers of online taxi or "technology-based application taxis" were rejected entirely by the Constitutional Court (MK). 

"The verdict heard, rejects the Petitioners’ petition in its entirety," said Chairman of the Plenary Hearing Anwar Usman in the presence of the other constitutional justices in the ruling hearing, Thursday (5/31) afternoon. 

The Petitioners who work as online drivers questioned Article 151 letter a of the LLAJ Law that states that one of the public transportation services not in trajectories is the taxi. In their petition, the Petitioners explained that the a quo provision had not accommodated the online taxi as one of the existing transportation services. This was considered detrimental to the Petitioners due to the exclusion of the online taxi in the a quo provision.

With respect to Case No. 97/PUU-XV/2017, the Court is of the opinion that if "technology-based application taxis" were made part of Article 151 letter a of the LLAJ Law, it would become a separate mode of transportation. If it were to be a separate mode, a question would arise on how to distinguish between other taxis and "technology-based application taxis." There are many similarities between the two, so "technology-based application taxis" can be classified as part of the taxi. 

"With the fulfillment of the criteria for the mode of transportation that has been regulated in Article 151 of the Road Traffic and Land Transportation Law, if the petition of the Petitioners was granted, there would be a vague concept regarding the transportation of passengers as stipulated in the Road Traffic and Land Transportation Law," said Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Aswanto when reading the opinion of the Court. 

According to the Court, the term "technology-based application" is not something that shows the categorization of the mode of transport, but rather how the users obtain or order the transportation services. The way in which customers obtain transportation services certainly cannot be used as a reason to determine that "technology-based application taxis" are a separate mode of the many modes of passenger transportation. 

The Court is of the opinion that the reality today shows that passenger transportation by taxi as referred to in Article 151 letter a of the LLAJ Law has also used technology-based applications. This shows that actually "technology-based application taxis" are not a mode of transport separate from those whose use has been arranged. Technology-based applications are merely a method of ordering transportation services. 

Based on the above considerations, according to the Court, Article 151 letter a of the LLAJ Law that does not contain or has not contained norms regarding "technology-based application taxis" as desired by the Petitioners does not necessarily contradict the 1945 Constitution. 

"Because when a norm does not or has not accommodated the aspirations or development of a society that is so dynamic, the norm cannot automatically be considered contradictory to the 1945 Constitution," said Justice Aswanto. 

In relation to the consideration, through the Constitutional Court Decision No. 46/PUU-XIV/2016 dated December 6, 2017, the Court affirmed that "Moreover, only because the material content of a legal norm is incomplete or not fully able to accommodate the aspirations that develop in society does not necessarily mean that the norm of the law is contrary to 1945 Constitution." "Based on the explanation of the aforementioned considerations, the Court is of the opinion that the Petitioners\' petition is unreasonable according to law," Justice Aswanto said. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)

---