---

The Petitioner’s attorney Rizky Dwi Cahyo Putra at the judicial review of the Law No. 2 of 2020 regarding the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2020 regarding the Stipulation of the State’s Financial Policy and Fiscal Stability for the Mitigation of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Thursday (27/8) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held another judicial review hearing of Law No. 2 of 2020 on the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2020 regarding 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 on Thursday, August 27, 2020.

The petition was filed by the Indonesian Anticorruption Community (MAKI), Mega Bintang Solo Indonesia 1997 Foundation, the Indonesian Community for Justice (KEMAKI), the Law Enforcement Monitoring Institute (LP3HI), and Peduli Keadilan (PEKA) Legal Aid. The hearing of case No. 38/PUU-XVIII/2020 had been scheduled to hear the Petitioner’s attorney’s clarification of the different proxies in the initial and revised petitions, as well as the Principal Petitioners’ proxies in their power of attorney.

“Once again we ask you clarification; did the person concerned write the signature or did somebody else do it? Upon observation, it seemed as if the strokes in the signature are one stroke,” Justice Aswanto asked about the validity of the signature on the power of attorney.

He said that the document hadn’t been brought to the Forensic Laboratory Center of the Indonesian National Police Headquarters for observation. “However, upon visual assessment, it seems that the strokes in each of the signatures are highly suspect. If this continues, there will be legal consequences. The Court has had experience with cases like this, [which] the Court reported to the police as falsification of documents," he explained.

Justice Aswanto advised that the petition be withdrawn to avoid legal issues and that the Petitioners submit the petition again following the Court’s procedural law.

“We also have similar concerns. Therefore, we will withdraw the petition,” said the Petitioners’ attorney Rizky Dwi Cahyo Putra.

Also read:

NGOs and Researchers Challenge COVID-19 Law

Petitioners of COVID-19 Law Reaffirm Arguments 

The Petitioners of case No. 38/PUU-XVIII/2020 petitioned for a formal and material review of Article 27 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of the Law on COVID-19.

Article 27 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3) of Law No. 2 of 2020 reads:

(1) Costs incurred by the Government and/or KSSK member institutions in the context of implementing state revenue policies including taxation policies, state expenditure policies including regional financial policies, financing policies, financial system stability policies, and national economic recovery programs, shall be part of the economic costs to save the economy from the crisis and shall not constitute a loss to the state.

(2) Members of the KSSK, the Secretary of the KSSK, members of the KSSK secretariat, and officials or employees of the Ministry of Finance, Bank Indonesia, the Financial Services Authority, and the Indonesia Deposit Insurance Corporation, and other officials relating to the implementation of this Government Regulation in Lieu of Law cannot be subjected to either civil or criminal charges while carrying out their duties based on good faith and in accordance with the provisions of the legislation.

(3) All actions including decisions taken based on this Government Regulation in Lieu of Law are not subject to lawsuit that can be filed to the state administration court.

The Petitioners believe that Article 27 of Law No. 2 of 2020 has given the administration or officials of the Financial System Stability Committee (KSSK), the Financial Services Authority (OJK), Bank Indonesia, and the Ministry of Finance impunity. These officials cannot be prosecuted in civil, criminal, or state administrative courts when carrying out their duties on the pretext of good faith where any costs incurred shall not constitute a state loss.

Writer: Utami Argawati
Editor: Nur R.
PR: Muhammad Halim
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 9/2/2020 12:46 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.

---