---

The Petitioner’s attorney Totok Surya at the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 6 of 2018 on Health Quarantine, Wednesday (22/7) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) dismissed the material review petition of Law No. 6 of 2018 on Health Quarantine at a ruling hearing to read Decision No. 34/PUU-XVIII/2020 on Wednesday, July 22, 2020. The petition was filed by Runik Erwanto and Singgih Tomi Gumilang, who 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.

Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul, who read out the Court’s legal opinion, stated that the Petitioners couldn’t elaborate on their constitutional damage due to the enactment of Article 55 paragraph (1) of the Health Quarantine Law along the word "people." He explained that the Petitioners as Indonesian citizens and advocates didn’t suffer any direct or indirect loss due to the enactment of the a quo norm.

The Petitioners argued that the air transportation restriction as part of the large-scale social restrictions (PSBB) implemented in the Jakarta Special Capital Region had violated their constitutional rights because it kept them from attending a trial at the West Jakarta District Court. However, the Court is of the opinion that they didn’t elaborate on their constitutional damage.

The Petitioners stated that as taxpayers they have the constitutional right to challenge any law. However, the Court believes this doesn’t necessarily mean that they have legal standing to file a judicial review petition. In order to have legal standing, there must be a logical correlation between the violation of constitutional rights and the enactment of the law.

“Upon careful examination of the Petitioners’ elaboration of their constitutional damage as taxpayers, the Court believes the Petitioners couldn’t elaborate on the constitutional damage in question specifically due to the enactment of the norm petitioned for review,” said Justice Manahan along with the other seven constitutional justices.

Also read:

Advocates Challenge Health Quarantine Law

Petitioners of Health Quarantine Law Strengthens Legal Standing 

In the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners argued that 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. They believed that travel ban during the PSBB was inappropriate to use as a legal basis because it only applies in a regional quarantine as regulated in Articles 53-55 of the Health Quarantine Law. They believed that the a quo article must be interpreted as constitutionally conditional, where only the necessities of the poor are covered by the central government, in order to minimize the quarantine budget of the central government.

Writer: Sri Pujianti
Editor: Nur R.
PR: Lambang T. S.
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 7/23/2020 20:53 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case where any differences occur between the English and the Indonesian version, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---