Litigants appearing virtually at the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 2 of 2002 on the Indonesian National Police, Tuesday (1/25/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Tuesday, January 25, 2022 | 13:55 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The judicial review petition of Law No. 2 of 2002 on the Indonesian National Police by Leonardo Siahaan and Fransiscus Arian Sinaga was rejected by the Constitutional Court (MK). “[The Court passes] a verdict to adjudicate, to declare to reject the Petitioners’ petition in its entirety,” said Chief Justice Anwar Usman alongside the other constitutional justices at the ruling hearing on Tuesday, January 25, 2022.

The Petitioners of case No. 60/PUU-XIX/2021 challenged Article 16 paragraph (1) letter d of the Police Law, which reads, “In implementing the duties as referred to in Article 13 and Article 14 for criminal cases, the National Police of the Republic of Indonesia shall authorize: d. to order the suspect to stop and examine his/her identity.” The Petitioners claimed they had anxiety that when they are doing their activity they could be stopped by the police to check their identity or ID cards following the a quo law.

Also read: Petitioners React over Police Checks in Media 

Reading out the Court’s legal considerations, Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul said that the absence of the authority limitation of the police in Article 16 paragraph (1) letter d of the Police Law was not a reason behind police acts that demean human dignity. The issue that the Petitioners argued about was not of norm constitutionality but of the implementation of the a quo article.

Police activities, which are often been broadcast in the media, have certain limitations as regulated in legislation, code of ethics, and other implementing regulations.

“Therefore, the police and people in the media are expected to always exercise caution in implementing their duties and functions, so as to keep upholding human rights and statutory legislation,” Justice Manahan said.

As such, the Court was of the opinion that Article 16 paragraph (1) letter d of the Police Law was constitutional. The Petitioners’ concern over acts that demean humanity and in violation of Article 28G paragraphs (1) and (2) of the 1945 Constitution and over arbitrary treatment against Article 28I paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution was a matter of norm implementation, not an issue of constitutionality.

Also read: Police Law Revised Following Justices’ Advice

The Petitioners, Leonardo Siahaan and Fransiscus Arian Sinaga, are Indonesian citizens who could potentially be examined by the police who are checking for IDs following the a quo article. Such patrols often occur at night, but are also common in the day. Police officers often scold, yell at, and shout at the person being examined in ways that demean human dignity. Such police checks are often available on television programs such as Program 86 and Jatanras on Net TV and The Police on Trans7 as well as YouTube channels such as Trans7 Official and 86 & Custom Protection.

The Petitioners believe that whether or not the identity of the person being investigated is complete, whether they are under the influence of alcohol or not, whether they are something wrong or not, do no excuse police officers to take actions that demean human dignity, let alone to have it broadcast to the general public on television, YouTube, or other media. They are also concerned about the potential mental damage caused by the consequences after the recording is accessed by the public.

Writer        : Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Andhini S. F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 01/25/2022 15:04 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.

---