The judicial review hearing of Law No. 11 of 2021 on Public Prosecution to hear the Petitioners’ witnesses virtually, Tuesday (10/18/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

Tuesday, October 18, 2022 | 14:57 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The another judicial review hearing for Law No. 11 of 2021 on the Amendment to Law No. 16 of 2004 on Prosecution continued in the Constitutional Court (MK) on Tuesday, October 18, 2022. The hearing for case No. 70/PUU-XX/2022 had been scheduled to hear the Petitioners’ witnesses.

Mangatur Hutauruk, a public prosecutor in North Sumatera, said virtually that the Prosecution Law had harmed him and his family. He was born on January 5, 1962 and was discharged on February 1, 2022. According to the Presidential Decree (Keppres) No. 16 of 2004, Article 12 letter c of the Prosecution Law, the retirement age of prosecutors is 62 years. Hutauruk revealed that he had applied to BRI for a loan in 2018. With a projected retirement age of 62, BRI gave a loan credit of 350 million for 5 years, to be paid until December 2022. Meanwhile, he had already been discharged on February 1, 2022.

“I appealed to Your Honors so that the enactment of Law No. 11 of 2021 on the Amendment to Law No. 16 of 2004 on Prosecution be reviewed, to return to Keppres No. 16 of 2004 with retirement age at 62 years. In April I was still working and had attendance. There was a decree of the Prosecution Office. I was only notified at the end of April, so I still had attendance until April and received salary of Rp87,939,480. With retirement in February, I had to return my salary. I was shocked because there was no information beforehand,” he said.

Meanwhile, Sanin, a 61-year-old functional prosecutor for special crimes with a rank of intermediate prosecutor (IV/c or middle administrator), emphasized that he is still working at the Attorney General’s Office. He is not subject to Article 40A of the Prosecution Law because he was already 60 when it was enacted.

“However, I disagreed with the notion that functional prosecutors who are 60 to 62 years old are unproductive in carrying out their duties. I’m still in active duty following Law No. 11 of 2021. It is also inaccurate to generalize functional prosecutors of 60-62 years that we all have middling performance. Many such prosecutors have good or even outstanding performance,” he said.

Next, Tugas Utoto revealed that he has been working in the Prosecution Office for 33 years and occupied positions in Sumatera to Papua. He received three presidential awards from President Abdurrahman Wahid, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY), and Joko Widodo (Jokowi).

“For that duration, I spent 30 years as a structural official. For the last three years I’ve been a functional prosecutor for general crimes. I’m still given P-16 or appointed as public prosecutor for dossier examination and case management. I last received notice of commencement of investigation (SPDP) on October 5. So, please hand down the best ruling for my unfortunate fellows,” he appealed.

Also read: 

Prosecutors Challenge Retirement Age Limit

Public Prosecutors Revise Petition on Retirement Age 

Change of Retirement Age of Public Prosecutors Based on Performance Assessment 

Court Hands Down Interlocutory Decision on Retirement Age of Prosecutors 

The petition No. 70/PUU-XX/2022 on the material judicial review of the Prosecution Law was filed by six public prosecutors—Irnensif, Zulhadi Savitri Noor, Wilmar Ambarita, Renny Ariyanny, Indrayati Siagian, and Fahriani Suyuthi (Petitioners I-VI). They challenge Article 40A of the Prosecution Law.

Article 40A of the Prosecution Law reads, “At the time this Law comes into force, the dismissal of Prosecutors aged 60 (sixty) years or more shall continue to comply with the provisions on the retirement age limit as stipulated in Law Number 16 of 2004 concerning Public Prosecution of the Republic of Indonesia (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2004 Number 67, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 4401).”

At the preliminary hearing on Tuesday, July 19, legal counsel Viktor Santoso Tandiasa said the Prosecution Law had harmed the Petitioners. Petitioners I, II, and III turned 60 on March 1, 2022; March 3, 2022; and April 16, 2022, respectively. They were impacted by the norms when entering retirement.

“In addition, the enactment of the a quo norms had caused restrictions on the careers and promotions of Petitioners I, II, and III,” he said.

Petitioners IV and V, who will turn 60 on November 24 and October 24 respectively, also experienced this. Based on those provisions, Viktor added, they would be forced to resign, hence restricting their careers and promotions.

“Due to those provisions, the Petitioners do not receive guarantee and fair legal protection as well as equality before the law, as guaranteed in Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. In addition, as citizens they did not receive equal opportunities as regulated in Article 28D paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution,” he emphasized.  

Writer        : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Raisa Ayudhita
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 10/19/2022 09:53 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.

---