Attorney Muhammad Joni with the principal petitioners in the judicial review hearing of Law No. 35 of 2015 on the Amendment to Law No. 23 of 2002 on Child Protection, Wednesday (22/1) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held a revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 35 of 2015 on Child Protection. The Petitioners are the Indonesian Child Protection Commission (KPAI), the Child Supervision and Protection Commission of Aceh (KPPAA), and the Child Supervision and Protection Commission (KPPAD) of West Kalimantan Province.
Represented by their attorney Muhammad Joni, the Petitioners conveyed the revision related to the background of the petition. They completed the constitutional juridical reasons in relation to KPAI, Aceh KPPA, and West Kalimantan Province KPPAD being merged.
"One of the reason is because the KPAI is a human right institution and therefore has the right to take the steps in relation to the monitoring of child protection and supervision of all areas of the Republic of Indonesia," Joni said to Constitutional Justices Enny Nurbaningsih (chair), Saldi Isra (member), and Wahiduddin Adams.
The Petitioners stressed that the Regional Child Supervision and Protection Commission (KPPAD) is needed to reach all children in Indonesia amidst increasingly complex issues.
"Therefore, we argued that the Regional Child Protection Commission is part of the implementation of the citizens\\' constitutional rights as stipulated in Article 28B paragraphs (1) and paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1), and Article 28I paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution."
They also revised the petition regarding Article 76 letter a of the Child Protection Law that the state, especially the Government, including the Indonesian Child Protection Commission, has the responsibility to advance the rights of children.
The Petitioners of case No. 85/PUU-XVII/2019 petitioned Article 74 paragraphs (1) and (2) along the phrases "If necessary, may" and "or another similar institution" and Article 76 letter a that stipulates that the Indonesian Child Protection Commission conducts supervision of the implementation of the protection and fulfillment of children\\'s rights.
The Petitioners argue that that Article 74 paragraph (1) of the Child Protection Law acknowledges that the KPAI is independent, but is limited as it is not united with the Regional Child Protection Commission (KPAD). The KPAI is weakened by Article 74 paragraphs (2) of the Child Protection Law that hinders the establishment of the KPAD with subjective requirements, relative norms, and absence of fair legal certainty.
They believe that the KPAD should not be a regional apparatus organization (OPD) that serves for the needs of the local government, but for the constitutional rights of children. Therefore, they argue that if is establishment is limited to fit the needs of the local government, it will contradict the constitutional mandate of Article 28B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. This, they argue, has led to ineffective or lack of infrastructure of the supervision of children\\'s rights guaranteed by Article 28B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA)
Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti
Thursday, January 23, 2020 | 10:58 WIB 156