The virtual judicial review hearing of Article 4 of Law No. 8 of 2022 on the South Kalimantan Province to hear the Relevant Party, Thursday (8/25/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

Thursday, August 25, 2022 | 14:18 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the fifth judicial review hearing of Law No. 8 of 2022 on the South Kalimantan Province on Thursday, August 25, 2022 to hear the testimonies of expert and witness for the Petitioners of cases No. 58/PUU-XX/2022 and No. 59/PUU-XX/2022 filed by the Banjarmasin City Chamber of Commerce and Industry (Kadin) (Petitioner I) and several individuals affiliated with the Banjarmasin City Communication Forum (Petitioner II-V), as well as case No. 60/PUU-XX/2022 petitioned by Banjarmasin mayor Ibnu Sina and the South Kalimantan DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) chairman Harry Wijaya.

“[The session] was supposed to hear the testimonies of expert and witness for the Petitioners, but for some reason it cannot take place. The expert’s written testimony was received outside of the deadline announced by the Court’s Registrar’s Office. So, this expert and witness hearing must be postponed. Before the session is adjourned, the Court will validate the Relevant Party’s evidence. The next hearing for these three cases will commence on Tuesday, September 13, 2022 at 11:00 WIB,” said Chief Justice Anwar Usman alongside the other eight constitutional justices from the plenary courtroom.

Also read:

Petitioners Against S. Kalimantan Capital Relocation Revise Legal Standing

Govt: Banjarbaru Designed as Buffer City for New State Capital’s Development

Relocation of Provincial Capital in Line with Banjarbaru City’s Vision

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners for case No. 58/PUU-XX/2022 explained that they had been harmed by the South Kalimantan Law since its formation had not involved the community. They alleged that the Law had harmed the entrepreneurs within the Banjarmasin City Kadin (Petitioner I) because the provincial capital city relocation would impact the economy, especially those in the accommodation, culinary, and construction businesses that would hinder the development of supporting infrastructure in Banjarmasin City.

Meanwhile, Petitioners II-V alleged that the ambiguity of the underlying factor of the relocation could harm them because the people’s welfare wouldn’t be a priority amid the economic turbulence due to the COVID-19 pandemic, rising prices, and re-allocation of the provincial budget (APBD) to the new capital city. They believed the relocation would need substantial funding, which could be used for COVID-19 mitigation, aids for the community, and for education.

The Petitioners of case No. 59/PUU-XX/2022 asserted that Article 4 of the South Kalimantan Law, which reads, “The capital city of South Kalimantan Province shall be located in Banjarbaru,” was against Article 1 paragraphs (2) and (3), Article 28D, Article 28F, Article 28H paragraph (1), Article 18B paragraphs (1) and (2) of the 1945 Constitution. Historically, they added, Banjarmasin City had an important role in the development of the province since the 1500s, where it first became a government center. Changing its position is the same as changing history, they declared. Therefore, the article is unconstitutional because, they alleged, there was no justice in disrespecting the history of Banjarmasin—an area full of with traditional rights of Banjarmasin that is still developing today as the capital city of South Kalimantan Province. Therefore, the Petitioners appealed to the Court to grant the petition in its entirety and declare the South Kalimantan Province Law unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as not interpreted to mean, “The capital city of South Kalimantan Province shall be located in Banjarmasin City and the government shall be located in Banjarbaru City.”

Meanwhile, the Petitioners of case No. 60/PUU-XX/2022 alleged through legal counsel Lukman Fadlun that the formation of the law had not involved the general public and that the House of Representatives (DPR) had not come to Banjarmasin to hear the people’s aspirations. In addition, it also had not pay attention to the harmony of the central-regional governments relations. This, they alleged, was because the South Kalimantan DPRD at its plenary session had not decided to relocate the provincial capital and the local government of Banjarmasin City had not been involved in the harmonization, conciliation, and stabilization of the legal conception until it became a draft of the bill.

Writer        : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Tiara Agustina
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 8/29/2022 08:08 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.

---