The preliminary hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 24 of 2009 on the National Flag, Language, Emblem, and Anthem, Tuesday (2/22/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Bayu.

---

Tuesday, February 22, 2022 | 22:41 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The preliminary hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 24 of 2009 on the National Flag, Language, Emblem, and Anthem (BBLNLK Law) unfolded in the Constitutional Court (MK) on Tuesday afternoon, February 22, 2022. The judicial review petition in case No. 12/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by Ludjiono, a retired civil servant at the Health Office of Situbondo Regency, East Java.

The hearing was presided over by Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh (panel chair), Wahiduddin Adams, and Saldi Isra. After the panel chair opened the session, he invited the Petitioner to introduce himself and conveyed the points of the petition. The Petitioner questioned the lack of definition of bahasa Indonesia in the BBLNLK Law.

“The identity or the information on Indonesian identity in the form of the definition of bahasa Indonesia, as referred to in Chapter III on the National Language Article 25, Article 30, and Article 40 of Law No. 24 Year 2009 on the National Flag, Language, Emblem, and Anthem, does not exist. Only the name bahasa Indonesia was mentioned, without any form or definition of bahasa Indonesia, or empty. [As an illustration,] it is like the name Sutonoyo as a state official who receives salary and allowances, when the person doesn’t exist,” the Petitioner explained.

He believes this was in violation of Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28E paragraphs (1) and (2), and Article 28I paragraph (1) pf the 1945 Constitution, which guarantee his constitutional rights. His national identity in the form of KTP (resident identity card) is in bahasa Indonesia, but the definition of the language itself does not exist.

The Petitioner asserted that he needed legal certainty for his national identity or KTP, which is his most prized possession. He felt that his honor, prestige and dignity had been impaired, and his mind and conscience disturbed.

Justices’ Advice

In response, Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams advised the Petitioner to study the judicial review petitions off the Court’s website.

“This is important so that [the petition] is improved. Second, please review the format, Mr. Ludjiono. You only mentioned Article 25, while it comprises three paragraphs. Therefore, don’t elaborate the articles too long, but please state which articles in the 1945 Constitution they violate,” he said.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra advised the Petitioner to emphasize the Constitutional Court’s authority to review his petition. He also advised the Petitioner to explain his constitutional impairment, potential and/or factual.

“You said that the definition was ambiguous in the KTP and so on. However, if you observe the 1945 Constitution, the national language is not [defined]. In Article 36, [it is stated that] the national language is bahasa Indonesia. There is no mention of which kind of bahasa Indonesia and so on. This is our constitutional reference in terms of language. It is the same with national anthem etc. So, in Chapter XV of the 1945 Constitution the national flag, language, emblem, and anthem are not defined,” he said.

Next, Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh highlighted the Petitioner’s petitum. “Your petitum, which you read out earlier, was lengthy. However, our point of reference at this hearing is [your petition] that we received on January 26. After this, you can revise [the petition] with a note: the Constitutional Court only reviews norms, not concrete cases,” he explained.

Writer        : Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Andhini S. F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 2/23/2022 12:09 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.

---