Chief Justice Anwar Usman and the other constitutional justices entering the courtroom for the formal judicial review hearing of Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital, Monday (5/9/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Monday, May 9, 2022 | 13:11 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The formal judicial review hearing of Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital (IKN Law) commenced in the Constitutional Court (MK) virtually on Monday, May 9, 2022 in the plenary courtroom. The hearing was for two cases, No. 25/PUU-XX/2022 and No. 34/PUU-XX/2022.

Initially, Padjajaran University professor Susi Dwi Harijanti was going to testify as an expert for the Petitioners of case No. 25/PUU-XX/2022. However, she had only submitted a written testimony, while the expert for case No. 34/PUU-XX/2022 was to testify at the next hearing.

“Therefore, today’s hearing is postponed until Thursday, May 12, 2022 at 13:30 WIB to hear the testimony of the expert for case No. 34/PUU-XX/2022,” said Chief Justice Anwar Usman.

Also read:

National Axis for State Sovereignty Challenges State Capital Law

Deemed Formally Defective, State Capital Law Challenged Again 

National Axis for State Sovereignty Adds 12 Other Petitioners in Case on State Capital Law

Din Syamsudin and Others Revise Petition on State Capital Law

Suharso Monoarfa Explains State Capital Law’s Vision and Mission to Form a World City

The case No. 25/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by Abdullah Hehamahua, Marwan Batubara, Muhyidin Junaidi, Lt. Gen. Suharto (Retired), Maj. Gen. Soenarko MD (Retired), Taufik Bahaudin, Syamsul Balda, Habib Muhsin Al Attas, Agus Muhammad Maksun, M. Mursalim R, Irwansyah, and Agung Mozin (Petitioners I-XII). They alleged that could not provide their inputs and criticism during the formation of the IKN Law, as it was formed in only 42 days. The hasty process led to the lack of public participation, which could potentially lead to horizontal conflicts.

Meanwhile, the case No. 34/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by 21 Petitioners of various professions such as academics, private employees, entrepreneurs, and journalists, Din Syamsudin, Azyumardi Azra, and Didin S. Damanhuri. They believe that their constitutional rights had been impaired by the enactment of the IKN Law.

Through legal counsel Ibnu Sina Chandranegara, they asserted that the formation of the IKN Law had only listened inputs from certain stakeholders but not those that reflect the Petitioners’ aspirations, had impaired their right to information and to develop themselves and their social environment. They also asserted that guarantee of acknowledgement and protection of their rights, legal certainty, and equality before the law had not been fulfilled due to the enactment of the a quo law.

The feel disadvantaged by the enactment of Article 1 paragraph (2) and paragraph (8), Article 4, and Article 5 paragraph (4) of the IKN Law, which they believe to be in violation of Article 18 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2), Article 18A paragraph (1), and Article 18B paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution for failing to fulfill acknowledgement and protection of their rights, legal certainty, and equality before the law.

Relating to the formal judicial review, the Petitioners argued that Article 27 paragraph (1) and Article 28C paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution provide opportunities for citizens to participate in government. If the formation of laws and regulations reduces community participation to debate and discuss the contents, then it can be said to have violated the people’s sovereignty.

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

Translation uploaded on 5/9/2022 14:40 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.

---