Chief Justice Anwar Usman opening the material judicial review hearing of Article 48 paragraph (1) of Law No. 11 of 2019 on the National System of Science and Technology, Tuesday (12/07/2021). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Tuesday, December 7, 2021 | 16:46 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—On November 25, 2021, the Constitutional Court (MK) ruled that Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation was conditionally unconstitutional. However, Heru Susetyo, the Petitioner of the material judicial review of Article 48 paragraph (1) of Law No. 11 of 2019 on the National System of Science and Technology (Sisnas Iptek) as amended by Article 121 of Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation, and its elucidation, insisted on continuing his case, said legal counsel Wasis Susetio at the fourth hearing on Tuesday afternoon, December 7, 2021, which the litigants attended virtually.

Plenary chair Chief Justice Anwar Usman asked the Petitioner’s legal counsel from the plenary courtroom, “The Court would like to ask, does the Petitioner want to withdraw the petition or advance to the next hearing? Given that all cases related to the Job Creation Law have been ruled, except this one. The Court gives the Petitioner the choice to either continue, to let the Court decide, or to withdraw [the petition].”

In response, Wasis said that the Petitioner would still like to continue to challenge the word ‘integrated’ in Article 48 paragraph (1) of the Sisnas Iptek Law and the phrase ‘among other things’ in its elucidation. “Thank you. We’d like to continue, Your Honor, to the next hearing,” he stressed.

Also read: Provision on Integration of Research Agencies to BRIN Challenged

In response, Justice Anwar said the next hearing would be scheduled normally. The litigants were expected to await further information from the Registrar’s Office.

“So, the Petitioner would like to continue with the case and, of course, let the Court decide. Therefore, the litigants, especially the Petitioner, are to await notification from the Registrar’s Office on the schedule of the next hearing,” said Justice Anwar on the case No. 46/PUU-XIX/2021.

Also read: Researcher Revises Petition on Provision on Integration of Research Agencies to BRIN

The Petitioner, who is a researcher, believes his constitutional rights have been harmed because the word ‘integrated’ in the a quo law is ambiguous. It is not clear whether it only concerns coordination of the preparation of plans, programs, budgets, and resources of science and technology in the fields of research, development, study, and application to produce inventions and innovations as scientific foundations in the formulation and stipulation of national development policies or the integration of the institutions.

The Petitioner argues that Article 42 of Law No. 11 of 2019 as a description or derivative of Article 13 paragraph (2) of Law No. 11 of 2019 clearly states that science and technology institutions consist of: a. research and development institutions, research and application institutions, universities, business entities, and supporting institutions. Referring to the provision of Article 42 in relation to coordination, the coordinated institutions are as stipulated in Article 42 of Law No. 11 of 2019. Therefore, in relation to the establishment of BRIN to carry out integrated research, development, study, and application, as well as inventions and innovations, the word ‘integrated’ gives rise to various interpretations, whether it is interpreted as coordination so that the existence and function of the institution remains as Article 42 of the Sisnas Iptek Law or as the synthesis of various government research institutions into one: the National Research and Innovation Agency (BRIN).

Also read: House and Govt Request Hearing on Sisnas Iptek Law Be Delayed

He also argues that the word ‘integrated’ cannot be separated from the previous articles—Articles 13, 42, 59, 60, 61, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 71, and 79. Thus, it can be concluded that the central government only serves as a coordinator. This is because the Sisnas Iptek Law explicitly states that BRIN is the central agency for research, development, study, and application as well as inventions and innovations. Thus, BRIN is a body that coordinates various institutions that carry out those activities, such as BATAN (the National Nuclear Energy Agency), BPPT (the Agency for the Assessment and Application of Technology), LIPI (the Indonesian Institute of Sciences), and LAPAN (the National Institute of Aeronautics and Space of Indonesia).

Writer        : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : M. Halim
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 12/8/2021 10:51 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---