Constitutional Justices Enny Nurbaningsih, Manahan M. P. Sitompul, and Arief Hidayat at the material judicial review of Law No.23 of 2004 on the Elimination of Domestic Violence, Wednesday (5/11/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Wednesday, May 11, 2022 | 14:39 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held another material judicial review hearing of Law No. 23 of 2004 on the Elimination of Domestic Violence (PKDRT Law) on Wednesday, May 11, 2022. The case No. 41/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by two students of the Indonesian Christian University (UKI), Sindi Enjelita Sitorus and Hesti Br Ginting (Petitioners I-II).

At the petition revision hearing, legal counsel Leonardo Siahaan conveyed to the Court that the power of attorney had been revised. “My error with regard to the power of attorney had been rectified. In addition, I had also rectified other matters, such as whether the psychological violence is also included in the discussion on the newly ratified [Law on the Elimination of Sexual Violence (TPKS)],” he said.

He added that they had added another piece of evidence in the form of a court decision. “The court decision has been attached in Exhibit P-5 in relation to psychological violence,” he added virtually. He also said that the petitum had been revised.

Also read: Psychological Violence in Elimination of Domestic Violence Law Questioned

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners alleged that Article 7 of the PDKRT Law did not provide clear definition of psychological violence, thus its interpretation could lead to debate. In addition, this potentially lead to constitutional impairment on the Petitioners. It, they alleged, also did not clearly define psychological violence, including that which can result in women being subject to lawsuit and criminalization. He asserted that the ambiguity raised concerns for the Petitioners, who feared they could be subjected to the same fate. What Ms. Valencya did was spontaneous and not intentionally to attack the victim’s psyche.

Degrading and insulting words that have serious consequences if carried out continuously constitute psychological violence. Based on these reasons, the Petitioners requested that the Court declare Article 7 of the PDKRT Law unconstitutional and conditionally constitutional as long as the phrase “forms of psychological violence: statements made with swear words, insults, negative labeling, or demeaning attitudes and body gestures accompanied by information about the psychological condition of a person who is a victim of psychological violence” is added.”

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

Translation uploaded on 5/11/2022 15:46 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.

---