Petitioner Singgih Tomi Gumilang and attorney Totok Surya in the revision hearing of judicial review of the Health Quarantine Law on Tuesday (30/6/2020) 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 second hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 6 of 2018 on Health Quarantine on Tuesday (30/6/2020). The hearing for case No. 34/PUU-XVIII/2020 took place with physical distancing to accelerate COVID-19 mitigation, in accordance with the health protocols set by the Indonesian Health Ministry and the World Health Organization (WHO).

In this revision hearing, Singgih Tomi Gumilang (Petitioner II) conveyed the revision to the petition, including to the legal standing. Runik Erwanto (Petitioner I) and Singgih Tomi Gumilang (Petitioner II) previously said they were advocates, but they changed their status to Indonesian citizens who are concerned with COVID-19 mitigation.

They also added the provision of Article 13 paragraph (1) of the Regulation of the Minister of Health No. 9 of 2020 on the Large-Scale Social Restriction Guidelines in Accelerating COVID-19 Mitigation. According to the Petitioners, the regulation regarding PSBB in the Regulation of the Minister of Health was expanded to include temporary closure of schools and workplaces, restrictions on religious activities, restrictions on activities in public places or facilities, restrictions on social and cultural activities, restrictions on modes of transportation, and restrictions on other activities, particularly relating to defense and security.

Also read:Advocates Challenge Health Quarantine Law

In the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners argued that Article 55 paragraph (1) of the Health Quarantine Law contradicts Article 28D paragraph (1) and Article 34 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. They felt the implementation of the PSBB had nothing to do with the travel restriction in and out of Jakarta, because the PSBB did not prohibit temporary closure of government offices. Air transportation restriction due to PSBB and the Eid al-Fitr homecoming travel ban was very detrimental to the Petitioners. The government should enforce regional quarantine, which will halt all activities including trials. However, the government has concerns that if regional quarantine is implemented, the central government must accommodate all the basic needs of all Jakarta residents.

The Petitioners also believe that travel ban during the PSBB was certainly inappropriate to use as a legal basis because such an ban only applies in a regional quarantine as regulated in Articles 53-55 of the Health Quarantine Law. In the a quo article, especially the phrase "basic necessities of the people," the problem for the government is if the regional quarantine was enforced, the government had concerns that it would have to pay for the food for residents who were subject to regional quarantine. The "people" refers to children, adults, old, male or female, rich or poor. According to the Petitioners, the a quo article must be interpreted as constitutionally conditional, where only the necessities of the poor are covered by the central government. That way, the quarantine budget for the central government would not too big. (Sri Pujianti/LTS/NRA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti

Translation uploaded on 7/2/2020