The Petitioners\' attorneys Saiful Anwar and Deny Adi in the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Guarantee, Monday (30/9) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) granted the withdrawal of judicial review petition of Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Guarantee (JPH). The Decision No. 49/PUU-XVII/2019 was read out in the ruling hearing on Monday (30/9/2019). LPPOM officials from 31 provinces had previously stated that Article 5, Article 6, and Article 47 paragraphs (2) and (3) of the Halal Product Guarantee Law contradicted Article 27 paragraph (2), Article 28C, Article 28E paragraph (2), Article 28J paragraph (2), and Article 29 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

Chief Constitutional Justice Anwar Usman stated that the Court had held a preliminary examination hearing on September 17, 2019 to listen to the petition. During the session, he added, the bench had given advice to the Petitioners to revise the petition, but on September 20, 2019 the Court received a letter from the Petitioners requesting the withdrawal of the petition. 

"Therefore, the Justice Deliberation Meeting on September 25, 2019 declared the revocation or withdrawal of the petition for Case No. 49/PUU-XVII/2019 legally grounded," Justice Anwar explained before the court, accompanied by seven other constitutional justices in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. 

The Petitioners stated that the a quo law had transferred the authority to determine halal certification from the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI) through its food and drug analysis agencies (LPPOM) to the Government through the Religious Affairs Ministry. The authority had been given to the MUI through the MUI Fatwa Commission Board by forming a special body, LPPOM MUI. In addition, this institution had been accepted by the public since 1989.

However, he added, Articles 5 and Article 6 of the JPH Law transferred the function of this institution to the Halal Certification Agency (BPJPH) is under the Religious Affairs Ministry. Meanwhile, Article 47 paragraphs (2) and (3) of the JPH Law resulted in the limitation and/or reduction of the authority of the MUI to BPJPH to cooperate with overseas halal certification institutions without including the MUI. This left the impression that foreign products were let to enter Indonesia without going through the halal certification process, or without the MUI fatwa. Therefore, in the petition, the Petitioners requested that the Court declare Article 5, Article 6, and Article 47 paragraphs (2) and (3) of the JPH Law contrary to the 1945 Constitution not having binding legal force. (Sri Pujianti/LA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti