---

Plenary ruling hearing of the judicial review of the MD3 Law, Wednesday (25/11) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Gani.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) approved the withdrawal of a petition by Sidik, Rivaldi, and Erwin Edison on the judicial review of Law No. 13 of 2019 on the Third Amendment to Law No. 17 of 2014 on the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), the Regional Representatives Council (DPD), and the Regional Legislative Council (DPRD), also known as the MD3 Law. The decree No. 66/PUU-XVII/2019 was pronounced on Wednesday, November 25, 2020 at a hearing presided over by Chief Justice Anwar Usman and the other eight constitutional justices.

“The [Court] declares, grants the withdrawal of the Petitioners’ petition, declares the petition No. 66/PUU-XVII/2019 withdrawn, declares the Petitioners no longer able to file the a quo petition,” said Justice Anwar before the Petitioners who attended the hearing virtually.

Also read: Three Advocates Challenges Third Amendment to MD3 Law

He read out that, pursuant to Article 34 of the Constitutional Court Law, the Court had held a preliminary examination hearing on November 11, 2019, in which the justices had offered advice for the petition revision. On November 25, 2019, the Court held a panel hearing to hear the petition revision and approve evidence. On January 8, 2020, the Court held a plenary hearing to hear the DPR (House of Representatives) and the president, where the Petitioners and the president’s attorney were present.

Also read: Advocates Challenging MD3 Law Revise Petition

At the hearing, both the House and the president’s attorney stated in writing and in person, respectively, that they weren’t ready to give their statements and requested that they be allowed to do so in the following hearing. On January 22, 2020, the Court held a plenary hearing to hear their statements, but on November 3, 2020, the Registrar’s Office received their petition withdrawal request.

“With regard to the withdrawal of the Petitioners’ petition and pursuant to Article 35 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Constitutional Court Law and based on a justice deliberation meeting on November 4, 2020, [the Court] hereby declares that the petition withdrawal is legally grounded and the Petitioners cannot re-file the a quo petition. [The Court] also 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,” Justice Anwar said from the plenary courtroom.

Also read: Govt Questions Legal Standing of Petitioners of MD3 Law

The Petitioners stated that their constitutional damage was focused on the mandate from the Petitioners/individual citizens to the Parliament to carry out their duties fairly, honestly, and responsible for the interests of the people. The constitutional loss in the formal review would be proven if the Petitioners felt that the House (DPR) had not carried out fiduciary duties that mandated by the people fairly, honestly, and responsibly, even though the Petitioners had used their right to vote to elect members of the House in the general elections.

The Petitioners believed that the 1945 Constitution did not regulate mandatory approval of the House and the President. If the formulation of laws was reviewed formally against the 1945 Constitution, they would not be unconstitutional since they were always approved by both institutions before being promulgated. 

In addition, the Petitioners alleged that the Third Amendment to the MD3 Law violated the procedure as regulated in the House rules of procedure as it was not included in the 2015-2019 National Legislative Program (Prolegnas) or the 2019 Prolegnas priority list. The Petitioners also argued that the MD3 Law was not supported sociologically and philosophically by qualified academic texts, thus did not meet the principles of the formation of legislation or, in other words, it followed a flawed procedure.

Writer: Sri Pujianti
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
PR: Raisa Ayudhita
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 11/26/2020 20:38 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.

---