The Petitioner and his legal counsels conveying revisions to the petition at the judicial review hearing of the Consumer Protection Law, Monday (3/28/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ilham W. M.

---

Thursday, March 28, 2022 | 15:56 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The petition revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 8 of 1999 on Consumer Protection was held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Monday, March 28, 2022. Petitioner Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak conveyed the revisions to the petition virtually.

The revision included that in the background of the petition. The Petitioner believed that although past Constitutional Court decisions affirmed protection for consumers, businesspeople use all kinds of methods to assert their rights. In the a quo case, he said, there are ways for businesspeople to oppress consumers.

“Businesspeople determined dispute clauses unilaterally, so that consumers would not have any choice in dispute resolution aside from what businesspeople determine,” he stressed before the bench chaired by Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul.

This, the Petitioner said, was taken advantaged by businesspeople to do practices that disadvantage consumers, such as setting dispute resolution at expensive locations and expenses. “This is clearly harming consumers,” he emphasized.

Also read: Bringing Grab Case Again, Zico Simanjuntak Challenges Consumer Protection Law

The Petitioner of case No. 23/PUU-XX/2022 argued factual constitutional impairment due to the enactment of Article 18 paragraph (1) of Law No. 8 of 1999 on Consumer Protection, which reads, “In offering the goods and/or services for trading, the entrepreneurs shall be prohibited from making or including a standard clause on each document and/or agreement if: a. it states the transfer of the entrepreneurs’ responsibility; b. it states that the entrepreneurs shall reserve the right to refuse to receive back the goods already purchased by the consumer; c. it states that the entrepreneurs shall reserve the right to refuse to refund for the goods and/or services already purchased by the consumer….”

In August 2019, the Petitioner joined a jugglenaut challenge organized by Grab Indonesia in which Grab users must use the GrabBike facility 74 times to be receive a reward of one million rupiahs. The Petitioner completed the challenge but he didn’t receive the reward. Then, on August 10, 2019, Grab Indonesia changed the challenge’s terms and conditions, which the Petitioner believes to be a violation of Article 18 paragraph (1) of Law No. 8 of 1999. He then filed a lawsuit to the Central Jakarta District Court, arguing that the mobile transportation company had changed the challenge’s terms and conditions unilaterally. Only after that did the company give the Petitioner the award in question.

Among the backgrounds to the petition is the lack of certainty in dispute settlement in Article 18 paragraph (1) of Law No. 8 of 1999. The Petitioner believes this is against Article 28 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, which guarantees protection and fair legal certainty and equal treatment before the law.

Writer        : Nano Tresna A.
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Raisa Ayudhita
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 3/29/2022 09:09 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.

---