The petition revision hearing for the judicial review of Law No. 26 of 2000 on the Human Rights Court, Wednesday (10/12/2022). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

Wednesday, October 12, 2022 | 15:27 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The Constitutional Court (MK) another material judicial review petition of Law No. 26 of 2000 on Human Rights Court on Wednesday, October 12, 2022. The case No. 89/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by Marzuki Darusman, Muhammad Busyro Muqoddas, and the Alliance of the Independent Journalists (AJI), who argue that the phrase ‘by an Indonesian citizen’ in Article 5 of the Human Rights Court Law is unconstitutional.

At the petition revision hearing, the Petitioners’ legal counsel Feri Amsari stated that the Petitioners also added the Elucidation to Article 5 of the Human Rights Court Law, elaborated their legal standing as active taxpayers and their constitutional impairment in relation to the articles in the Constitution.

Feri detailed that Petitioner III is a non-governmental organization has been consistently fighting for freedom of the press and the public’s right to information transparency. It is also affiliated with an ASEAN federation of journalists. Unfavorable situations in ASEAN, including in Myanmar, Feri added, would affect journalists.

“[In Myanmar] the military junta has removed the rights of journalists. To that end, Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution provides guarantee, protection, fair legal certainty, and equality before the law. So, with this guarantee of legal protection, AJI uses its constitutional rights as part of the citizenry and seeks to protect everyone’s right to equality before the law, especially for victims of human rights violators,” he said before Constitutional Justices Wahiduddin Adams (panel chair), Saldi Isra, and Enny Nurbaningsih.

Also read: Boundaries of Human Rights Court Questioned

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners argued that the phrase ‘by an Indonesian citizen’ in Article 5 of the Human Rights Court Law had eliminated the state’s responsibility to keep world peace, as the 1945 Constitution mandated, and eliminated the state’s responsibility in crimes in which another state is involved. The current political situation in Myanmar is still in disarray after the military declared a state of emergency. Gross human rights violations have been committed and are still ongoing.

(Argentine professor of human rights law) Juan E. Mendez stated that the state has the responsibility to protect victims and the people in case of massive, systemic crimes on human rights. The problem is that under the limits of Article 5 of the Human Rights Court Law, victims of human rights violations in Myanmar would find it difficult to fight for their constitutional rights. Myanmar citizens cannot petition the International Criminal Court because Myanmar did not sign the Rome Statute. It would also be impossible for a country such as Myanmar with its military junta to establish a human rights court to try their officials who have committed human rights violations

The Petitioners believe there has been a legal vacuum in the case of gross human rights violations in Asia, so there needs to be a way to protect citizens, not only of Myanmar but also of ASEAN in general, so that they could have the right to personal defense. He said that it would be a very progressive legal move to grant the petition. Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Court grant the entire petition and “declare the phrase ‘by an Indonesian citizen’ in Article 5 of Law No. 26 of 2000 on Human Rights Court unconstitutional.”

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

Translation uploaded on 10/17/2022 21:39 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.

---