The petition revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital for the case No. 53/PUU-XX/2022, Wednesday (5/11/2022). Photo by Humas MK/BPE.

---

Wednesday, May 11, 2022 | 14:16 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The judicial review hearing for the Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital (IKN Law) commenced in the Constitutional Court (MK) on Wednesday, May 11, 2022. Teacher Anah Mardianah filed the case No. 53/PUU-XX/2022. The petition revision hearing had been scheduled to examine revisions to the petition. However, the Petitioner’s legal team stressed that there had been no revision to the background of the petition.

Represented by legal counsel Naufal Rizky Ramadhan and colleagues, the Petitioner affirmed his backgrounds and constitutional impairment, one of them being that the IKN Law had not met both the formal and material requirements of lawmaking.

Partial and Non-holistic

The Petitioner believed that the public representation in the discussion of the Bill had been highly partial and non-holistic when the discussion on the development of the state capital city must expand participation of parties from all regions, groups, and elements in the community.

“As such, there is no revision to the petition’s backgrounds,” Naufal emphasized before the panel chaired by Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih.

Also read: Teacher Challenges State Capital Law 

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner’s legal counsel Reza Setiawan stated that the House of Representatives (DPR) as the legislature and the president as the executive have the right to propose a bill. For a Law to be ratified, it must first be discussed and approved by the House and the president.

“A Law must be formed in order to guarantee legal certainty and justice, and to create order and welfare for all Indonesians, not only for certain groups or individuals,” he added.

In the petition, the Petitioner revealed that on January 18, the House officially declared the IKN Bill part of the 2020 National Legislative Program (Prolegnas). However, before it was passed, there was push back from the provincial and local governments, which was disregarded by the central government and the House. On February 15, the president passed the IKN Law. This, the Petitioner believes, show that it took less than a month for the a quo Law to be passed since it entered the Prolegnas. As such, it did not involve the people. Therefore, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare the formation of the IKN Law unconstitutional.

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

Translation uploaded on 5/11/2022 15:29 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.

---