Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh chairing the panel petition revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights, Monday (4/11/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Monday, April 11, 2022 | 17:02 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held another judicial review hearing of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights on Monday, April 11, 2022 to examine the revisions to the petition. The case No. 30/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by Achmad Kholidin, a law lecturer of the Jakarta Muhammadiyah University, and Tasya Nabila, an activist affiliated with the nongovernmental organization (NGO) Lentera HAM. They challenge Article 83 paragraph (1), Article 85 paragraph (1), Article 86, and Article 87 paragraph (2) letter d of the Human Rights Law.

Before the bench chaired by Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh, legal counsel Firyal Gilang Harifi said that the petition had been revised following the justices’ advice. The changes included the format following the Constitutional Court Regulation No. 2 of 2021. “The articles to be reviewed are included in the [Petitioners’] legal standing,” he added.

The touchstones had also been elaborated. “The touchstones have been elaborated one by one, Your Honors. All of the articles to review have then been broken down one by one,” he stressed. He concluded by saying that the petitum had also been revised.

Also read: Komnas Ham Selection Process Questioned

The Petitioners had previously asserted that Article 83 paragraph (1) had led to legal uncertainty due to multiple interpretations of the clause “The National Commission on Human Rights comprises 35 (thirty-five) members.” The Petitioners asserted the provision was unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted to mean “The National Commission on Human Rights comprises nine members selected by the House of Representatives and certified by a presidential decree.”

In addition, they stressed that the phrase “based on the recommendation of the National Commission on Human Rights” was unconstitutional. Consequently, they requested that the Constitutional Court grant the petition and declare Article 83 paragraph (1), Article 85 paragraph (1), Article 86, and Article 87 paragraph (2) letter d of the Human Rights Law unconstitutional and not legally binding.

Writer        : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Andhini S. F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 4/12/2022 09:27 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.

---