Constitutional Court justices holding the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law Number 23 of 2006 on Population Administration, Wednesday (11/12) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Gani.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) dismissed the petition of Law No. 24 of 2014 concerning the Second Amendment to Law No. 23 of 2006 concerning Population Administration filed by student Asrullah on Wednesday (11/12/2019) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. The Petitioner of case No. 64/PUU-XVII/2019 argued that Article 83A paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Population Administration Law was unconstitutional.

In the legal consideration read out by Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams, the Court stated that based on Article 39 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Constitutional Court Law, the Court conducted a preliminary examination hearing on October 30, 2019, which was attended by the Petitioner. During the hearing, the panel of justices also gave advice for the Petitioner to revise the petition within 14 days until November 13, 2019. However, until said date, the Registrar\'s Office did not receive the revised petition while, in fact, the Court had scheduled a session to revise the petition of the a quo case.

"The Constitutional Court summoned the Petitioner legally and properly with Registrar Letter Number 529.64/PAN.MK/11/2019 dated November 4, 2019. However, on the day of the scheduled hearing until the Court was in session at 14:43 WIB, the Petitioner was not present and could not be contacted. In addition, the Petitioner did not submit a revised petition. Therefore, in order to fulfill the principle of a simple, fast, and economical court, the petition of the Petitioner must be declared null and void," said Justice Wahiduddin in the ruling hearing chaired by Chief Justice Anwar Usman, accompanied by the other seven constitutional justices. 

In the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner had stated that the Population Administration Law included the appointment and dismissal of first-class (pratama) officials at the provincial and regency/city levels within the minister\'s purview. The structural officials referred to in a quo article are not explained, but the arrangements are delegated in more technical legislation regarding career development. 

The Petitioner believe that granting the authority to the minister to appoint and dismiss structural officials in population and civil registration at the provincial and regency/city level is not in accordance with the spirit of the Constitution and the philosophy of regional autonomy. Therefore, through the petitum, he requested that the Court declare Article 83A paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Population Administration Law contrary to the 1945 Constitution and not legally binding. (Sri Pujianti/LA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti