---

The Petitioners’ attorneys in the preliminary examination hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 2 of 2020 on the State’s Financial Policy and Fiscal Stability for the Mitigation of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Tuesday (7/7) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—Triono and Suyanto, two village heads from Ngawi, East Java requested the judicial review of Law No. 2 of 2020 on the Government Regulation In Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2020 on the Stipulation of the State’s Financial Policy and Fiscal Stability for the Mitigation of the COVID-19 Pandemic and/or in Order to Face Threats That Endanger the National Economy and/or the Financial System’s Stability into Law to the Constitutional Court (MK). The hearing of case No. 47/PUU-XVIII/2020 took place on Tuesday (7/7/2020) and was presided over by Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams along with Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.

The Petitioner’s attorney M. Sholeh said that Article 28 paragraph (8) of the COVID-19 Law contradicts Article 23 paragraph (1) and Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. Since 2015, the Petitioners has benefitted from village funds from the central government as mandated by Article 72 paragraph (2) of Law No. 16 of 2014 on Villages. The funds have been used for the village’s development. The Petitioners believe the enactment of a quo article potentially stops the disbursement of such funds.

The Petitioners have only received two installments of the funds in 2020, with one remaining unclear. Sholeh said that during the COVID-19 pandemic, the funds that used to be allocated for the village’s infrastructure and community empowerment, must be allocated to villagers who are directly affected by the pandemic. "With the enactment of Article 28 paragraph (8) of the COVID-19 Law, there is no guarantee that [future] development that has been discussed and planned can be carried out," said Sholeh.

The Petitioners understand that the funds might be delayed or redirected to other causes due to COVID-19, but stated that it would be problematic if village funds were to be declared null relating to state financial policies for COVID-19 mitigation and/or in order to face threats that endanger the national economy. They also believe that Article 28 paragraph (8) of the COVID-19 Law is not in accordance with Article 2 paragraph (1) letter l, which doesn’t specify that the pandemic will motivate the central government to eliminate village funds.

Use of State Finances

At the same hearing, the justices also examined the petition of advocate Damai Hari Lubis who, through attorney Arvid Martdwisaktyo, challenged Article 27 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of the COVID-19 Law. the Petitioner believes that if in the future any abuse by officials regarding the implementation of the COVID-19 mitigation is discovered, the a quo article will keep him from accessing transparent, valid information on the use of COVID-19 mitigation funds.

“The Petitioner does not want this pandemic be used by officials to abuse authority and commit corruption,” said Arvid while conveying the subjects of the petition of case No. 49/PUU-XVIII/2020.

Legal Standing

In response to case No. 47/PUU-XVIII/2020 Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo advised the Petitioners to consider their position as village chiefs that represent their villages. “When someone represents a region, an MP [must be included]. So what is the requirement for [a case] petitioned by a village chief? Is community representation needed to affirm their legal standing?” he asked the attorney.

In response to case No. 49/PUU-XVIII/2020 Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo advised that the Petitioner explain his constitutional rights that are violated by the enactment of Article 27 of the COVID-19 Law. “Explain it clearly so that the Court understands that the Petitioner really suffered a loss,” he said.

Illustration from Other Countries

Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams advised the Petitioners of both cases to provide arguments relating to other countries’ efforts in COVID-19 mitigation. “Try to compare and search for latest developments in other countries and in Indonesia so as to explain the Petitioners’ losses,” he said.

Before concluding the session, Justice Wahiduddin reminded the Petitioners to submit a revised petition no later than Monday, July 20, 2020 at 13:00 WIB to the Registrar’s Office of the Constitutional Court. (Sri Pujianti/RA/NRA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti

Translation uploaded on 7/8/2020

---