---

Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih reading out the legal considerations in the ruling hearing of the judicial review hearing of the Law on the Establishment of Sungai Penuh City in Jambi Province, Monday (7/9) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) declared the judicial review petition of Law No. 25 of 2008 on the Establishment of Sungai Penuh City in Jambi Province not accepted. The Decision No. 3/PUU-XVIII/2019 was read out in a ruling hearing on Wednesday, November 25, 2020. In the petition, the Petitioners argued that Article 13 paragraph (1), (3), (5), (7), (8), and (9) of the Law on the Establishment of Sungai Penuh City was unconstitutional.

“The Petitioners didn’t have the legal standing to file the a quo petition. [The Court] declares the Petitioners’ petition cannot be accepted,” said Chief Justice Anwar Usman reading out the verdict.

Also read: Affected by Regional Proliferation, Civil Servants Challenge Law on the Establishment of Sungai Penuh City 

Reading out the legal considerations, Justice Enny Nurbaningsih explained that Petitioners I-IX are Indonesian citizens, while Petitioners IV and V are former Kerinci Regency DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) members of 2014-2019, Petitioner VIII is the chairman of Kerinci DPD (Regional Representatives Council) KNPI (National Committee of Indonesian Youth) of 2019- 2022 although didn’t represent the organization, and Petitioner IX was involved in the asset handover from Kerinci Regency. However, as the a quo petition was concerned with the handover of regional assets and funding, the Court believes this fell within the purview of the regional government, and was not a matter of citizens’ constitutional impairment.

“With regard to this, the Court through Decision No. 70/PUU-XII/2014 dated November 6, 2014 declared that any judicial review petition that represents regional interests must be filed by the regional government. Therefore, although [Petitioners I-IX] had concerns over Kerinci Regency, they could not represent Kerinci Regency. Therefore, the Court believes the Petitioners did not suffer any impairment to their constitutional rights, so they did not have the legal standing to act as petitioners in the a quo petition,” she said at the virtual hearing.

Also read: Proliferation Part of Government’s Effort to Improve People’s Welfare

Legal Standing Issue 

Justice Enny said that the justice panel had offered their advice at the preliminary hearing on January 16, 2020 for the Petitioners to strengthen their legal standing. At the petition revision hearing, the Petitioners only added Kerinci Regent as Petitioner X, the chairman of Kerinci Regency DPRD as Petitioner XI, and two vice chairmen of Regency DPRD as Petitioners XII and XIII. However, these additional petitioners were separate legal subjects and didn’t represent the regional government of Kerinci Regency.

The power of attorney for Petitioners XI-XIII were separate. The Court believes that although this was valid, the regent and DPRD members should have been one Petitioner in the petition. “Therefore, if the regional government of Kerinci Regency had been the one to file the petition to the Court, the DPRD would have to prove this based on a DPRD plenary session that approved of the filing of the judicial review of Law No. 25 of 2008 to the Court,” Justice Enny explained.

Also read: Jambi Governor: Asset Separation between Kerinci Regency and Sungai Penuh City Lawful 

To prove their legal standing, the Petitioners submitted a proof of a Kerinci Regency DPRD plenary session with Kerincy Regent. However, it took place on March 18, 2020, when the petition had been examined at a plenary examination hearing. Referring to the Constitutional Court Decision No. 24/PUUXVI/2018, the Court reinforced its stance that to file a petition on the rights and authorities of the regions, the DPRD must obtain approval in a plenary session before the petition is filed to the Court.

“Therefore, the Court did not consider the evidence in question [and Petitioners X-XIII] cannot be said to have filed the a quo petition as a regional government, thus did not qualify as a regional government. Not to mention, the Petitioners could not provide evidence of the plenary DPRD hearing that took place before the petition was filed to the Court. Therefore, the Court believes [Petitioners X-XIII] did not have legal standing to file the a quo petition,” Justice Enny stated.

Also read: Bagir Manan: Kerinci Regency Also Need Special Funds 

Following Legislation 

With regard to the assets of Kerinci Regency that was used by the Sungai Penuh City government, Justice Saldi Isra said the issue didn’t occur after Law No. 25 of 2008 had been passed. In the legal considerations, the Court stated that the asset handover had followed Law No. 32 of 2004 and the Government Regulation No. 78 of 2007. Pursuant to Article 13 paragraph (3) of Law No. 25 of 2008, the handover of assets and documents of Kerinci Regency was to take place no later than five years since the inauguration of the acting Mayor of Sungai Penuh for the effectiveness of administration, development, and community services so that the employees, land, office buildings, equipment, and existing public facilities could be used immediately in Sungai Penuh City.

“The asset handover was a legal action to realize the mandate of Law No. 25 of 2008 (vide the Elucidation to Law No. 25 of 2008). If the process that had been agreed upon in various document, which was then included in the Elucidation to Law No. 25 of 2008, had not been realized by Kerincy Regency, the Governor of Jambi as the representation of the central government in the region would have been responsible to resolve it (vide Article 13 paragraph (8) of Law No. 25 of 2008). Therefore, the establishment of Sungai Penuh City had been done in compliance with the statutory law. Therefore, the Petitioners’ argument on legal uncertainty was groundless,” Justice Saldi stated.

Also read: Asset Handover from Kerinci Regency to Sungai Penuh City Done Gradually  

The issue in this case stemmed from the proliferation of Kerinci Regency into a new autonomous city named Sungai Penuh, while four other regencies in Jambi Province were expanded into regencies. This difference resulted in the movement of the regency capital to Bukit Tengah Village, Siulak Sub-district. The expansion of Kerinci Regency into two autonomous regions was the consequence of the proliferation within the conditions stipulated in the Proliferation Law.

In addition, although the new regency capital was imposed on Kerinci Regency, the special funding was given by the Central Government to Sungai Penuh City, even though the parent regency also needed funding for the development of infrastructure in the infrastructure-deficient Bukit Tengah Village.  

Writer: Sri Pujianti
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
PR: Lambang S.
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 11/26/2020 20:18 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.

---