Petitioners’ Attorney Johni Bakar conveying the petition revisions of the judicial review of the State Civil Apparatus (ASN) Law, Monday (3/12) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

The judicial review hearing of Law No. 5 of 2014 on the State Civil Apparatus (ASN Law) was held once again by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Monday (3/12). The Petitioners of Case Number 91/PUU-XVI/2018 examine Article 87 paragraph (2) of the phrase "may be honorably discharged or cannot be discharged," Article 87 paragraph (4) letter b, and Article 87 paragraph (4) letters d of the ASN Law. 

Johni Bakar as attorney of the Petitioners delivered a number of revisions, including the addition of a concrete case experienced by the Petitioners. The Petitioners argued there were administrative errors that had criminal consequences due to ignorance, fear, pressure, and unequal power relations in carrying out the duties of the Petitioners and ASN in general. 

"If the subordinates do not carry out the orders of their superiors, they are also at risk of getting sanctions because they are considered disloyal to their superiors. Therefore, it is important to disclose the [transgressions committed by] each defendant who worked as civil servants and becomes the basis for revoking some or all of his rights," said Johni before the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Anwar Usman as chairperson of the session. 

The Petitioners also affirmed the petition regarding the court ruling, in that the court ruling that has permanent legal force, the there was no dictum instructing the revocation of part or all of the defendants\' rights as civil servants, let alone dishonorable discharge. 

"More specifically, Petitioner II has lost his job that was guaranteed by Article 27 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. Even though the Petitioners have been subjected to criminal and administrative penalties as described earlier. The Petitioners have served [as] ASN, of course it appeals to [one\'s] sense of justice if the [offenses] that had started from administrative errors made by the Petitioners resulted in the loss of work. This is certainly not only detrimental to the Petitioners, but also to the nuclear families of the Petitioners who depend on [them]," explained Johni. 

In addition, the Petitioners revealed that in the Criminal Code, there were known additional provisions on the revocation of certain rights. In criminal law, revocation of certain rights is one of the additional provisions as also stipulated in Article 10 of the Criminal Code, which regulates additional provisions consisting of revocation of certain rights, seizure of certain goods, and announcement of judges\' decisions. 

The judicial review of Law Number 5 of 2014 was requested by Novi Valentino and four other Petitioners. The Petitioners review Article 87 paragraph (2), Article 87 paragraph (4) letter b, and Article 87 paragraph (4) letter d of Law Number 5/2014. Petitioner I (Novi Valentino) works as a civil servant (PNS) based on the Decree of the Regent of North Bengkulu. Petitioner I had been charged with joint corruption offense by the First Class (1A) Bengkulu District Court, through Decision Number 18/Pid.Sus/TPK/2016/PN.Bgl, on February 2, 2016 and sentenced to 1 year and 3 months. At present, the Petitioner I has finished serving the sentence at the Arga Makmur Class 2B Penitentiary on May 30, 2017 based on Certificate Number W8.PAS.3.PK.01.01.02-275 dated September 24, 2018 signed by the Head of the Correctional Institution. 

Meanwhile, Petitioner II has been temporarily dismissed according to Bengkulu Governor\'s Decree Number P.635 of 2016. Petitioner II is no longer a civil servant. Petitioner III has also been charged with joint corruption offense along with Petitioner IV. Petitioner V was sentenced to imprisonment with charges of corruption and given sanctions by the Governor through the Decree of the Governor of North Sumatra. 

The Petitioners expected the enactment of the law to continue to have due process of law and a sense of justice. They believe the corruption eradication efforts has become an elimination of the Petitioners and ASN because, in the practice that they experienced, if the court acquitted the defendants (the Petitioners), the panel of judges trying it would actually receive the spotlight from the public, the Judicial Commission, and the press, even though the public does not know the defendant\'s role and actions materially. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)