Petitioner Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak delivering the subjects of petition in the material review of Criminal Law, Wednesday (25/9) in the Panel Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the judicial review hearing of Law No. 1 of 1946 on Criminal Law Wednesday (25/9/2019) in the Panel Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. The preliminary examination hearing of case No. 53/PUU-XVII/2019 was presided over by Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto, with Constitutional Justices I Dewa Gede Palguna and Wahiduddin Adams. 

Petitioner Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak, a youth who loves Pancasila and supports the enforcement of Pancasila as state foundation for the sake of the integrity of the nation and state in Indonesia. He challenges Article 107 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code (KUHP) as amended by Law No. 1/1946 that reads, "The attempt undertaken with the intent to cause a revolution shall be punished by a maximum imprisonment of fifteen years."

According to the petitioner, at present, there is no law that prohibits anyone from campaigning to replace Pancasila with any other ideology, except Marxism-Leninism. As a result, there are movements to replace Pancasila with liberalism and the caliphate. He argued that all articles on criminal sanctions are centered on regulating the spread of communism/Marxism-Leninism, even though Pancasila also faces threats of other ideologies. 

Thus, it is clear that in the current status quo, anyone who acts to replace Pancasila as state ideology cannot be convicted, as long as such actions do not result in social unrest or cause loss of life or property loss. Therefore, the a quo article in the Criminal Code does not provide fair legal protection because it does not protect Pancasila as the state foundation. In fact, the article is a crime against state security, which includes also the crime against the state ideology. The a quo article also does not meet criminal objectives if it does not protect Pancasila as the state foundation. So, based on these reasons, through the petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Constitutional Court declare the article having no legal force and in conflict with the 1945 Constitution. 

Justices’ Advice 

Responding to the petition, Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna advised the Petitioner to describe in more detail the legal standing associated with the impairment of the Petitioner\\\'s constitutional rights. Constitutional Justice Wahidudin Adams advised the Petitioner to attach evidence as a reference for justices in examining the petition in accordance with procedural law and to link the article to review with the loss suffered by the Petitioner.

Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto said that the article that had been decided 3 times by the Court. Thus, the Petitioner can read the legal considerations of those decisions before elaborating his loss in the petition. Before ending the session, Justice Aswanto conveyed that the Petitioner should revise the petition and submit the revision by Tuesday, October 8, 2019 to the Registrar\\\'s Office. (Utami/LA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti