---

Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh (panel chair), Wahiduddin Adams, and Manahan M. P. Sitompul at the petition revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2020 on the Constitutional Court, Tuesday (15/12/2020) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held another judicial review hearing of Law No. 7 of 2020 on the Third Amendment to Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court on Tuesday, December 15, 2020. The petition No. 100/PUU-XVIII/2020 was filed by R. Violla Reinida Hafidz, M. Ihsan Mualana, Rahmah Mutiara, Korneles Materay, Beni Kurnia Ilahi, Giri Ahmad Taufik, and Putra Perdana Ahmad Saifulloh (PetitionersI I-VII).

The Petitioners alleged that Article 15 paragraph (2) letters d and h, Article 18 paragraph (1), Article 19, Article 20, Article 23 paragraph (1), Article 59 paragraph (2), and Article 87 of the Constitutional Court Law are unconstitutional. They are members of the Coalition to Save the Constitutional Court that intends to monitor the Constitutional Court’s authorities. The coalition was formed in 2015. It comprises of Kode Inisiatif, the Jakarta Legal Aid Institute, and other organizations whose activities concern the Constitutional Court’s activities.

One of their attorneys, Mulki Shader, conveyed the revisions to the petition, i.e. the format and background especially regarding the Petitioners’ legal standing, as well as the addition of three more attorneys. He stated that in relation to the formal judicial review, the revision to the Constitutional Court Law was finished in 7 days in a non-natural disaster, thus violating the Petitioners’ constitutional rights of equality in law and government.

“Materially, the term of office of chief and deputy chief constitutional justice in this provision pulls incumbent constitutional justices in the political dynamics,” Mulki said before the Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh (panel chair), Wahiduddin Adams, and Manahan M. P. Sitompul.

Also read: Researchers, Lecturers Challenge Formation of Constitutional Court Law 

At the preliminary hearing on Thursday, November 19, 2020, the Petitioners in their petition said lawmakers had manipulated the law under the pretense of following up on the Constitutional Court’s decision. The revision of the law also violates the carry-over principle and the formation of good statutory laws. It also cannot be accounted for academically and is only a formality. The discussion was carried out behind closed doors without involving the public.

In the material judicial review, Kurnia added, the Petitioners challenge the limitation of the background of Supreme Court-nominated justice candidates in Article 15 paragraph (2) letter h of the Constitutional Court Law and the position of constitutional justice candidates as the representation of the nominating agencies. He also said that the Petitioners questioned that the constitutional interpretation of the recruitment system of constitutional justice in Article 19 of the Constitutional Court Law and its elucidation as well as Article 20 paragraphs (1) and (2). They also questioned the constitutional interpretation of the minimum age of constitutional justices and their term of service.

Writer: Sri Pujianti
Editor: Nur R.
PR: Lambang T. S.
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 12/17/2020 07:47 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.

---