Abdul Hakim as Petitioner delivering principal points of petition revision of the judicial review of the Manpower Law, Wednesday (26/9) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

The Constitutional Court held a second hearing of Law No. 13/2003 on Manpower on Wednesday (26/9) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. During the petition revision hearing, Abdul Hakim as Petitioners, an Indonesian citizen who worked as an employee of PT Internusa Food, presented several improvements to the petition, one of which is the Constitutional Court Decisions No. 27/2011 dated January 17, 2012 and No. 7/2014 dated November 4, 2015 on the judicial review of Manpower Law.

For example in Decision Number 27/2011, Abdul added, the Constitutional Court was of the opinion that in case of a dispute on the conditions that must be met in the transfer of employment status from PKWT (work agreement for a specified period) to PKWTT (work agreement for an unspecified period) that could not be resolved through dispute resolution available outside the court, it could be resolved through the court.

"So, according to the Petitioner, if the a quo petition questioning the absence of a guarantee of certainty of rights and equal treatment of the right to receive wages during employment termination process of workers who originally had PKWT to PKWTT and workers who originally had PKWTT was granted, it has guaranteed \'the legal certainty of the transition from PKWT to PKWTT when the workers are still working,\'" Abdul said before the hearing led by Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams who was accompanied by Constitutional Justices Saldi Isra and Enny Nurbaningsih.

The Petitioner of case No. 72/PUU-XVI/2018 had stated that Article 59 paragraph (7) of the Manpower Law potentially impaired his constitutional rights. According to the Petitioners, with the enactment of the a quo article since his first day of work on March 6, 2012, he was bound by PT Internusa Food with a work agreement for a specified period, which has been extended 11 times. He had attempted to change its status to one for an unspecified period of time through the Industrial Relations Court Decision of the Central Jakarta District Court No. 6/Pdt.Sus-PHI/2018/PN.Jkt.Pst dated July 12, 2018 (IRC Decision).

However, the IRC Decision resulted in PT Internusa Food terminating the employment (PHK) of the Petitioner unilaterally since July 28, 2017 with the reason that the PKWT agreement had expired. He further explained that on the transition from the initial employment from PKWT to PKWTT, the Supreme Court had eliminated the worker’s rights in the form of wages during the termination process as established by the IRC.

Therefore, the Petitioner requested that the Constitutional Justices revoke Article 59 paragraph (7) of the Manpower Law. In addition, he requested that the a quo article be declared conditionally unconstitutional if it was interpreted to abolish the right of the worker to wages during the termination process which was originally based on a work agreement for a specified period into one for an unspecified period. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)