---

Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams reading out the Court’s opinions at the ruling hearing of judicial review of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights, Monday (28/9) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The judicial review petition of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights dismissed, said Chief Justice Anwar Usman alongside the other eight constitutional justices at the ruling hearing of case No. 52/PUU-XVIII/2020 on Monday, September 28, 2020. The petition was filed by Alamsyah Panggabean, a resident of Tanjung Botung Village, Barumun Subdistrict, Padang Lawas Regency, North Sumatera Province.

In its legal considerations, the Court stated that the Petitioner requested the judicial review of Article 15 of the Human Rights Law but in the posita questioned the establishment of Padang Lawas Regency based on Law No. 38 of 2007 on the Establishment of Padang Lawas Regency in North Sumatera Province, and specifically the filling of the vacancy of the Regional Legislative Council (DPRD) of Padang Lawas Regency through a decree. The Petitioner didn’t explain which mechanism had disadvantaged him.

The Petitioner also requested the Government of the Republic of Indonesia that he “be given facilities and special treatment in order to be declared a Padang Lawas Regency DPRD member.” He also related the provision of the filling of Padang Lawas Regency DPRD seats per Law No. 38 of 2007 with Law No. 39 of 1999 along the word“individually” in Article 15 of the Human Rights Law. He believed the article was in violation of the word “collectively” in Article 28C paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

Petition Obscure

The Petitioner believed the word“individually” in Article 15 of the Human Rights Law was unconstitutional insofar as it not be interpreted as “collectively” but didn’t elaborate on the contradiction between the word and Article 28C paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, the petition didn’t meet the requirements as stipulated in Article 5 of the Constitutional Court Regulation No. 06/PMK/2005 on the Judicial Review Procedural Law.

“The absence of sufficient argument from the Petitioner regarding the unconstitutionality of the word“individually” in Article 15 of Law No. 39 of 1999 and the absence of elaboration on the relation between word and the Petitioner’s explanation on Law No. 38 of 2007, according to the Court, has made the Petitioner’s petition incomprehensible. Therefore, the Court believes the Petitioner’s petition to be obscure,” said Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams reading out the Court’s legal opinions.

Also read:

Human Rights Law Challenged Regarding Right to Self-Development

Petitioner of Human Rights Law Affirms Petition

Tapanuli artist Alamsyah Panggabean claimed to be descended from Siraja Panggabean, who hailed from Pansur Napitu, Siatas Barita Sub-district, North Tapanuli Regency, who descended from a king of the Batak lands. He believed the enactment of Article 15 of Law No. 39 of 1999 has obstructed his right to develop and to obtain facilities and special treatment in order to obtain equal opportunities and benefits in the government because the governance planning and supervision in Padang Lawas Regency, North Sumatra Province is carried out by political parties without including him as a member for planning and supervision in the periods 2009-2014, 2014-2019, and 2019-2024.

Article 15 of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights reads, “Everyone has the right to develop himself by individually and collectively protecting his rights, in the interests of developing his society, nation, and state.” 

The Petitioner stated that on August 10, 2007 Law No. 38 of 2007 on the Establishment of Padang Lawas Regency in North Sumatera Province was passed into law. The law stipulates that Padang Lawas Regency carries out regional autonomy as an extension of the central government, including in the planning and supervision of development. Article 12 paragraph (1) and Article 13 paragraph (1) of the law stipulates that the recruitment of the first period of the Regional Legislative Council (DPRD) of Padang Lawas Regency was through a decree, not an election or through the Election Law in accordance with Article 18 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution.

The Petitioner requested that the Court interpret Article 15 of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights along the word“individually” as a government regulation and for the first time the regulation on the stipulation of the Petitioner as a Padang Lawas Regency DPRD member be determined following existing legislation and would be so in the future.

Writer: Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor: Nur R.
PR: Tiara Agustina
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 8/29/2020 22:40 WIB

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

---