---

Plenary ruling hearing of the judicial review of the Manpower Law, Wednesday (25/11/2020) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Gani.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) passed a decree on the case No. 66/PUU-XVIII/2020 on the judicial review of Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower, which was filed by Slamet Iswanto and Maul Gani. The decree was read out by Chief Justice Anwar Usman in the ruling hearing on Wednesday, November 25, 2020 virtually.

Justice Anwar said the Court had received a letter from the People’s Advocacy Team for Laborers (TAR-PB) dated November 3, 2020 on the request to withdraw the judicial review petition in case No. 66/PUUXVIII/2020 on the judicial review of Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower.

Also read: Provision on Positions and Employment Period for Expatriates Challenged

A justice deliberation meeting (RPH) on November 4, he added, had approved the request on the ground that it had legal grounds. “The [Court] declares, grants the withdrawal of the Petitioners’ petition. The petition No. 66/PUUXVIII/2020 on the judicial review of Article 42 paragraph (4) along the phrases “certain positions” and “certain periods of time” and in Article 42 paragraphs (5) and (6) of Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower against the 1945 Constitution has been withdrawn. The Petitioners can no longer file the a quo judicial review petition. [The Court] orders the Registrar’s Office of the Court to record the withdrawal of the Petitioners’ petition in the constitutional case registration book and to return the copies of the dossier to the Petitioners,” he said alongside the other eight constitutional justices. 

Also read: Omnibus Law “Takes Over” Provision on Expatriates from Manpower Law

The Petitioners of case No. 66/PUU-XVIII/2020 are Slamet Iswanto (Petitioner I) and Maul Gani (Petitioner II). The two residents of Southeast Sulawesi Province challenged the phrases “certain positions” and “certain periods of time” in Article 42 paragraph (4) of the Manpower Law. They felt disadvantaged by the enactment of the a quo article, which reads, “Workers of foreign citizenship can be employed in Indonesia in employment relations for certain positions and for a certain period of time only.” 

They claimed that the phrase “certain positions” is ambiguous and is not well-explained in the elucidation to the law. There is no specific explanation on the positions in question or the type of positions that expatriates can be employed for. They believe this provision allows the Government to interpret it however it wishes. They also believe that it discriminates them as local workers because it also doesn’t specify the period of employment for expatriates to work in Indonesia.

The Petitioners argued that they can fill certain positions for foreign workers as stipulated in the Decree of the Minister of Manpower No. 228 of 2019 and that the phrase “certain periods of time” is ambiguous and harm the Petitioners’ chances to find work. They concluded that, therefore, the phrases “certain positions” and “certain periods of time” are in violation of Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. 

Writer: Utami Argawati
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
PR: Annisa Lestari
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 11/25/2020 17:44 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.

---