Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto and Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and Wahiduddin Adams in the judicial review hearing of the Law on the State’s Financial Policy and Fiscal Stability for the Mitigation of the COVID-19 Pandemic, Monday (5/10) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The petition revision hearing of the formal judicial review 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 was held by the Constitutional Court on Monday afternoon, October 5, 2020.

An attorney of the Petitioners of case No. 75/PUU-XVIII/2020 Ibnu Sina Chandranegara said that the power of attorney and the petition’s arguments had been revised. “The current composition of the Petitioners are 43 individuals and 4 legal entities, but 3 of the legal entities and 14 of the individuals didn’t sign the power of attorney. The 14 individuals were marked in the power of attorney, as well as the 3 legal entities, because they couldn’t fulfill obligations,” he said to the justice panel led by Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto.

Also read: Law on COVID-19 Challenged Again

The Petitioners revised some terms and made an emphasis of Article 28 of Law No. 2 of 2020. “We stress that even if the [law] is for emergency, we believe that Law No. 2 of 2020 in essence contains the stipulation of a government regulation that responded to a health crisis similar to that which still applies today. Therefore, regardless of the form, we believe it is a law that regulates [actions] in emergency situations. The petitum remains the same and was signed by all attorneys per the justices’ direction [at the previous hearing],” he explained.

The Petitioners of case No. 75/PUU-XVIII/2020 are 56 petitioners, consisting of individuals and Muslim groups the Persatuan Islam’s (Persis) central executive, Wanita Al-Irsyad, and Pemuda Al-Irsyad’s executive board. They challenge Article 2 paragraph (1) letter a numbers 1, 2, and 3; Article 6 paragraph (12); Article 27; and Article 28 of the Elucidation to Law No. 2 of 2020. Some of the petitioners have challenged the law in case No. 23/PUU-XVIII/2020, which was rejected by the Court.

The Petitioners believe the articles challenged to be explicitly and implicitly not in line with the principles of a legal state as stipulated in the 1945 Constitution. This is because some of the a quo provisions give the president absolute authority and deny the lawmaking authority of the DPR (House) and DPD (Regional Representatives Council). The a quo provisions also gives institutions and/or policy executors impunity should there be any violation of abuse of authority.

Writer: Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
PR: M. Halim
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 10/06/2020 20:19 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.