Constitutional Justices Wahiduddin Adams and Suhartoyo at the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 15 of 2006 on the Audit Board, Monday (6/20/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
Monday, June 20, 2022 | 21:34 WIB
JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) ruled the material judicial review petition of Article 13 letters f, i, and j of Law No. 15 of 2006 on the Audit Board (BPK) inadmissible. The ruling hearing for Decision No. 29/PUU-XX/2022 took place on Monday, June 20, 2022 in the plenary courtroom. The legal considerations for the case filed by Boyamin bin Saiman and Marselinus Edwin Hardian (Petitioners I-II) were read out by Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo and Wahiduddin Adams.
Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams stated that Article 13 letter j of the BPK Law was created to avoid potential conflicts of interest and abuses of authority by elected BPK members if they were previously state finance management officials. Such a case would result in the disruption of the BPK members’ independence, integrity, and professionalism in carrying out their duties and authorities because, he added, they are required to have left their previous position in state finance management for two years. This requirement is meant to prevent conflicts of interest between relevant parties—the selection committee and the candidates—as well as abuses of authority.
“This is because such a situation is possible if the elected BPK member uses his/her authority to audit the results of his/her past work before he/she becomes a member of the BPK. Therefore, it is very important to set a time limit to an official managing state finances to participate in the election of BPK members,” Justice Wahiduddin said.
Then, the provision on the period of “at least 2 (two) years” in Article 13 letter j of Law No. 15 of 2006 had been considered by the Court in Decision No. 106/PUU-XII/2014. In essence, it is stated that elected BPK members can only carry out an audit of financial management carried out one year earlier. This is to prevent them from auditing the results of their work as a financial management official before they are elected as a BPK member.
Also read: Requirements for BPK Members Questioned
Applying to All Candidates
Furthermore, Justice Wahiduddin asserted that the Petitioners’ petitum that Article 13 letter j of the BPK Law be interpreted as “never having committed any digression and acts of corruption while holding a position as state finance management officer” had been accommodated in Article 13 letter g, which reads, “g. having never been sentenced to imprisonment based on a court decision that has permanent legal force for committing any criminal offense punishable by a sentence of 5 (five) years or more.” In other words, said requirement not only applies to BPK member candidates who were state financial management officials, but also to those who were not. Thus, this requirement applies to all prospective candidates who wish to participate in the election of BPK members without exception.
Also read: Boyamin bin Saiman Revises Material Judicial Review Petition of Requirements for BPK Members
Not Constitutionality Issue
Meanwhile, the Court asserted that the Petitioners’ claim of two candidates that should not have been nominated by the House of Representatives (DPR) during the fit and proper test because they had not met the requirements of the a quo article was not a matter of the constitutionality of the norm. It is a matter of implementation of the norm and not within the Court’s jurisdiction, the Court emphasized. Thus, the Petitioners’ argument regarding the unconstitutionality of Article 13 letter j of the BPK Law as long as it is not interpreted as “never having committed any digression and acts of corruption while holding a position as state finance management officer” is legally groundless.
“[The Court] declares the petition of Petitioners I and II related to Article 13 letter i of Law No. 15 of 2006 on the Audit Board inadmissible,” Chief Justice Anwar Usman when reading out the verdict before the litigants virtually.
The Petitioners of case No. No. 29/PUU-XX/2022 asserted that Article 13 letter f of Law No. 15 of 2006 potentially eliminated the Petitioners’ right to be selected as members of the BPK. It was revealed that Petitioner I has not finished his undergraduate degree but was familiar with financial digressions that lead to state loss, meaning he had capability but was restricted by his education status to apply as a BPK member.
Meanwhile, Petitioner II was not yet 30 years old, thus did not meet a requirement set in the a quo article and could not be selected as a BPK member. The Petitioners believed this potentially eliminated the rights of citizens insofar as they were not interpreted to have maturity in science and technology.
In addition, the Petitioners asserted that the enactment of Article 13 letter j of the BPK Law, which stipulates that BPK members should have left a position in state financial management for at least two years, was unconstitutional if not interpreted to mean “not committing any digression and acts of corruption while holding a position as state finance management officer.”
In the petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Court declare Article 13 letter f of the BPK Law unconstitutional if not interpreted as smart and astute in applying science and technology, and Article 13 letter i of the BPK Law unconstitutional if not interpreted as mature in terms of application of science and technology. They also requested that Article 13 letter j of the a quo Law be declared unconstitutional if not interpreted as never having committed any digression and acts of corruption while holding a position as state finance management official.
Writer : Sri Pujianti
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR : M. Halim
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 6/21/2022 08:24 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.
Monday, June 20, 2022 | 21:34 WIB 233