Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams chairing a panel petition revision hearing for the judicial review of the Job Creation Law petitioned by advocates and legal practitioners, Wednesday (2/9/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ilham W.M.

---

Wednesday, February 9, 2022 | 21:24 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the petition revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 30 of 2014 on State Administration as referred to in Article 175 point 6 of Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation for case No. 10/PUU-XX/2022 on Wednesday, February 9, 2022.

The Petitioners’ legal counsel Eliadi Hulu conveyed the revisions to the petition before the panel chaired by Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams. In the part on the Constitutional Court’s authority, the Petitioners added that the materials of the Job Creation Law were not legally binding. Their application was reinforced in the Constitutional Court Decision No. 64/PUU-XIX/2021, in which the Court declared in its legal considerations that even though the Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 declared the Job Creation Law conditionally unconstitutional, it could still be petitioned for review because it is still in effect until formal amendment is made within two years. “This is because in the period for formal amendment, it is possible that there will be changes or improvements to the substance made by the legislators,” he said.

Meanwhile, Petitioner Viktor Santoso Tandiasa explained that although in Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 the Court declared any strategic and wide-encompassing policies and new implementing regulations regarding said law are put on hold for two years, in practice the Government has taken actions and made policies and new implementing regulations in relation to the Job Creation Law.

Also read: Presidential Endorsement Hindered, Ummah Party Challenges Presidential Threshold

The case was filed by advocate Victor Santoso Tandiasa, PSHK (Indonesian Center for Law and Policy Studies) researcher Muhammad Saleh, and student Nur Rizqi Khafifah (Petitioners I-III). They challenge Article 53 paragraph (4) of Law No. 30 of 2014 on State Administration as referred to in Article 175 point 6 of Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation.

Article 175 point 6 of the Job Creation Law reads, “If within the time limit as referred to in paragraph (2), the Government Agency and/or Official does not make a decision and/or take action, the petition is considered legally granted.”

At the preliminary hearing on Thursday, January 27, 2022, the Petitioners’ legal counsel Parningotan Malau asserted why Article 175 point 6 of the Job Creation Law was unconstitutional. Due to the provision, Petitioner I had not received a state administrative decision despite having filed a petition to the Director-General of General Legal Administration of the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, because it had impaired court authority to rule on the petition, which was considered legally granted.

The a quo article could also potentially impair the constitutional rights of Petitioners II and III because, as citizens who are concerned with state administrative issues, the lack of court authority on such a fictitious positive appeal also affect their advocacy.

Writer        : Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Fitri Yuliana
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 2/10/2022 09:18 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.

---