Examination hearing of the judicial review of the KPK Law, Tuesday (19/11) in the in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Gani.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing for three judicial review petitions of Law Number 19 of 2019 concerning the Second Amendment to Law Number 30 of 2002 concerning the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK Law) against the 1945Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia on Tuesday (19/11/2019).

Petition No. 70/PUU-XVII/2019 was filed by academics of the Islamic University of Indonesia (UII) Yogyakarta: Fathul Wahid (Rector), Abdul Jamil (Law Faculty Dean), Eko Riyadi (Director of the Center for Human Rights Studies), Ari Wibowo (Director of the Center for Economic Crime Studies/PSKE of the Law Faculty), and Mahrus Ali (Law Faculty lecturer). Petition No. 71/PUU-XVII/2019 was filed by university student and expert staff of DKI Jakarta DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak. Petition No. 73/PUU-XVII/2019 was filed by university students Ricki Martin Sidauruk and Gregorius Agung.

Attorney for Petitioners of case No. 70/PUU-XVII/2019 said that in the drafting of the KPK Law had procedural flaws. They considered the revised KPK Law potentially disrupting corruption eradication agenda. They also revealed that the formation of the drafting of the KPK Law was not in the House’s National Legislative Program (Prolegnas) priority list. They believe the discussion on the law this year very forced.

According to the Petitioners, the KPK Law does not have legal certainty because the current KPK employees cannot be appointed as state civil apparatus (ASN) due to vacuum of laws and regulations. In addition to the formal review, the Petitioners also filed for a material review of Article 1 number 3, Article 3, Article 12 B, Article 24, Article 37B paragraph (1) letter b, Article 40 paragraph (1), Article 45A paragraph (3) letter a, and Article 47 of the a quo law against the 1945 Constitution. 

In their petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Constitutional Court declare Article 43 paragraph (1) of Law Number 19 of 2019 conditionally unconstitutional insofar as it is interpreted "That only the professions/government agencies as mentioned in the a quo articles require KPK Investigators, so that only people from those professions or government agencies can be appointed and dismissed as Investigators of the Corruption Eradication Commission by the Executives of the Corruption Eradication Commission."

Petitioner No. 71/PUU-XVII/2019 Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak questioned the formation of a supervisory council within KPK by lawmakers. According to him, the council deviates from the supervision system and will lead to the weakening of corruption eradication by the KPK. In addition, the KPK supervisory council’s authority to authorize wiretapping, search, and seizure exceeds the supervision limits. This shows that the supervisory council is superior and has more authority than the KPK executives.

Petitioners No. 71/PUU-XVII/2019 said that KPK investigators should not have to be appointed among the police, prosecutors, KPK, and/or other government agencies. According to Ricki, by limited recruitment of KPK investigators could potentially reduce its independence. This provision should have given every citizen free space to take part in efforts to improve the nation, including to eradicate corruption. (Utami/LA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti