Panel revision hearing of the judicial review of the Foundation Law through video conference, Monday (6/8) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court held a judicial review hearing of Law No. 16/2001 on Foundations on Monday afternoon (6/8). The second hearing heard the revision to the petition by Petitioner Mandala Waluya Foundation from Kendari.

Represented by legal counsel Hamalin through video conference from Kendari, Southeast Sulawesi, the Petitioner conveyed the petition revisions including the legal standing. "The Petitioner [claimed to have] a legal standing to carry out judicial review of Law Number 16 of 2001 on Foundations and Law Number 28 of 2004 on the Amendment to Law Number 16 of 2001 on Foundations," Hamalin said before the Constitutional Court Panel led by Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams. 

In addition, the Petitioner disclosed several articles in the 1945 Constitution the petition refers to. "Among them is Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. Maybe I need to read it [before the Court] in full. Then, Article 28D paragraph (2) adheres to the principle that everyone has the right to work. From the job one will receive income in the form of salary, wages, rewards, or others to support oneself and one\\'s family, as well as fair treatment. That is, if one\\'s group has the right to salary, one also has the right to salary or wages," Hamalin explained. 

The petition No. 65/PUU-XVI/2018 was submitted by the Director of the Kendari Mandala Waluya Foundation, La Ode Saafi. The Petitioner believes that the foundation is an association established by capital owners who intended to channel their assets to those in need by establishing a forum to channel their assets through a foundation solely for social, humanitarian, and religious purposes. Those capital owners do not expect rewards, salary, or wages, because those founders are already affluent. 

But according to the Petitioner, referring to the provisions of Article 1 paragraphs (3) and (4) of Law No. 13/2003 on Manpower, the foundation employees as "worker" have the right to salary, wages, compensation from the foundation, and the foundation as "employer" is obliged to provide salary, wages, rewards to the foundation staff as workers. If this is ignored by the employer, then it clearly violates human rights. 

Therefore, the Petitioner reviews Article 3 paragraph (2) of Law No. 16/2001 that reads, "Every Foundation is not allowed to distributed proceeds of business activities to patrons, executives and supervisors." In addition, Article 5 paragraph (1) of Law No. 28/2004 reads, "Assets of a Foundation either in the form of money, goods, or other properties procured by the Foundation under this Law are prohibited to be transferred or distributed directly or indirectly, either in the form of salary, wage, or honorarium, or in other forms that may be valued as money to the Governing, Executive and Supervisory Boards."

According to the Petitioner, Article 3 paragraph (2) of Law No. 16/2001 and Article 5 paragraph (1) Law No. 28/2004, in addition to contradicting Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, are also not in line with Article 1 paragraphs (3) and (4) of Law No. 13/2003 on Manpower. 

With the inclusion of articles on human rights in the Amendment of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, as a consequence, the rights of every Indonesian citizen must be protected by the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)