Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih reading out a dissenting opinion at the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 34 of 2004 on Indonesian National Armed Forces, Tuesday (3/29/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Tuesday, March 29, 2022 | 23:49 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the judicial review petition of Law No. 34 of 2004 on Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI Law) filed by Euis Kurniasih, Jerry Indrawan G, Hardiansyah, A. Ismail Irwan Marzuk, Bayu Widiyanto, and Musono.

“[The Court] adjudicated, rejects the Petitioners’ petition in its entirety,” stressed plenary hearing chair Chief Justice Anwar Usman reading out the verdict of Decision No. 62/PUU-XIX/2021 at a ruling hearing on Tuesday, March 29, 2022.

The Court was of the opinion that the TNI’s role in state defense is upholding the people’s sovereignty, maintaining the territorial integrity of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia (NKRI), and protecting the entire homeland of Indonesia from threats and disturbances. With global developments, threats to the integrity of the nation and state also come outside of the military. National defense requires the integration of military and non-military defense through efforts to build strong national defense forces and capabilities.

“As an instrument of the state, the National Police also plays a role in maintaining security and public order, enforcing the law, providing protection, and serving the community so it is required to have professional expertise and skills,” said Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat reading out the Court’s opinion.

Also read:

Gap in Retirement Age Between TNI and Police Questioned

Petitioners of TNI Law Convey Revisions

Retirement Age Limit of TNI

The Court asserted that the retirement age limit of TNI soldiers, which the Petitioners believed should have been made equal to that of police officers, was the legislatures’ open legal policy, which could be changed following the demands of development needs and the types, specifications, and qualifications of the positions or through legislative review.

Even so, the Court stressed, the TNI and the Police’s roles differ despite being equally strategic as the key force in the Total People’s Defense and Security System (Sishankamrata).

According to the president and the House of Representatives (DPR), which the Relevant Party (TNI Commander) supported, the amendment to the TNI Law, including the retirement age limit, has been listed in the Second Amendment Bill of the National Legislative Program (Prolegnas) for 2020-2024. So, in order to provide legal certainty, the Court asserted, the legislatures should prioritize the revision to the TNI Law in the not too distant future.

Based on its considerations, the Court stated that the phrase “a maximum age of 58 (fifty-eight) years for officers, and 53 (fifty-three) years for enlisted and non-commissioned officers” in Articles 53 and 71 of the TNI Law not unconstitutional and, thus, the entire petition of the Petitioners was legally groundless.

Also read:

Army Commander Testifies at Hearing on TNI Law 

TNI Law Revision Bill in 2022 Prolegnas Priority List 

Dissenting Opinion

Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto along with Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo, Wahiduddin Adams, and Enny Nurbaningsih expressed a dissenting opinion. They believed the petition, which requested that the retirement age of enlisted and non-commissioned officers be set following that of officers, must have been granted as it was legally warranted.

“Therefore, the phrase ‘a maximum age of 53 years for enlisted and non-commissioned officers’ in Articles 53 and 71 of the TNI Law was unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as interpreted as ‘the retirement age of TNI soldiers for enlisted and non-commissioned officers be equated to that of police officers,’” said Justice Enny.

The four constitutional justices also has a dissenting opinion on the legal standing of Petitioner I in relation to the Petitioners’ argument that the phrase “Officers shall carry out military service until a maximum age of 58 (fifty-eight) years for officers” in Article 53 and the phrase “The maximum retirement age of 58 (fifty-eight) years for officers and 53 (fifty-three) years for enlisted and non-commissioned officers, only applies to TNI soldiers who, as of the date this law is enacted, have not been declared retired from the TNI service” in Article 71 letter a.

“Based on the legal facts in the proceedings, Petitioner I could not prove that they were a legal subject who had special expertise warranting an equal retirement age to that of police officers. Thus, there was no reason for Petitioner I to be given a legal standing to file a judicial review [petition] of the phrase in Article 53, which stipulates ‘Officers shall carry out military service until a maximum age of 58 (fifty-eight) years for officers’ in Article 53 and in Article 71 letter a of Law No. 34 of 2004,” Justice Enny emphasized.

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

Translation uploaded on 4/5/2022 08:47 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.

---