Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates

---

Tuesday, September 27, 2022 | 17:49 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The debate on the three-period limit of the term of the chairperson of the advocate organization wound up in the Constitutional Court (MK). Advocate Zico Leonard Djagardo Simajuntak filed a petition to challenge provision on the term of advocate organization’s chairperson in Article 28 paragraph (3) of Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates. The preliminary hearing of the case No. 91/PUU-XX/2022 took place on Tuesday, September 27, 2022 virtually and on site in the plenary courtroom.

The Petitioner argued that factually, there was no legal certainty relating to the term limit and leadership regeneration of the advocate organization. He added that senior advocates such as Hotman Paris Hutapea had also expressed their disagreement. Hutapea, the Petitioner revealed, had also questioned the leadership of the three-term Peradi (Association of Indonesian Advocates) chairman Otto Hasibuan, who had changed the organization’s statute/bylaw to legitimate the three-term limit.

“Potential impairment according to logical reasoning is inevitable because advocates have lost their rights, especially to be the organization’s leader, due to the authoritarian leadership that is not limited by the a quo law. Therefore, it is appropriate that the Petitioner take legal efforts as a law enforcer in reorganizing the ideal organization of advocates,” said legal counsel Fepti Yolanda.

Legal counsel Saut Hamonangan Turnip said there is no checks and balances mechanism in the article, which could lead to authoritarianism. Therefore, a clear term limit is necessary in order to prevent potential abuse of power, which could stem from personal ambition, that would harm the members, cause internal division, and keeping professional advocates with integrity from advancing the organization.

Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare Article 28 paragraph (2) of Advocate Law unconstitutional as long as it is not interpreted as “The chairman of the advocate organization shall take office for two terms at the most and afterward cannot be reelected in the same position and cannot hold a position of a chairman of a political party concurrently, both in the central and regional levels.”

Justices’ Advice

Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo advised the Petitioner to reformat the petition. “The explanation of the Court’s authorities is too long. Make if five points only: the law that emphasizes the Court’s authorities, the Judicial Law, and the Constitutional Court Law,” he said. He also asked the Petitioner to distinguish the issue of constitutionality versus implementation. He reminded that Peradi is divided into factions.

“If you talk about Peradi, there is that which is led by Otto Hasibuan, one by Juniver Girsang, one by Luhut Pangaribuan, and so on. How can an issue with one led by Otto Hasibuan be used to generalize the others? Please exercise caution. The Petitioner will have to see whether this is an issue of constitutionality or implementation,” he said.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra (panel chair) explained that the Petitioner questioned Article 28 paragraph (3) of Advocate Law in the posita but requested the annulment of Article 28 paragraph (2). He cautioned that it would make the petition obscure.

“If you would like [the article] be declared unconstitutional, it would be annulled in entirety. If you would like it be declared conditionally constitutional, please quote the entire norm first, then explain what kind of condition you wish for,” he added.

The Petitioner was given 14 workdays to revise the petition and submit the revision by Monday, October 10, 2022.

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

Translation uploaded on 10/13/2022 15:31 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.

---