Legal counsel Viktor Santoso Tandiasa explaining the subject matter of the petition at the preliminary hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 22 of 2009 on the Road Traffic and Land Transportation, Wednesday (10/19/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

Wednesday, October 19, 2022 | 15:15 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 22 of 2009 on the Road Traffic and Land Transportation (LLAJ) on Tuesday, October 18, 2022 in the plenary courtroom. The case No. 98/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by journalist Irfan Kamil, who argued that Article 273 paragraph (1) of the LLAJ Law and its elucidation were contrary to Article 1 paragraph (3) and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

Article 273 paragraph (1) of the LLAJ Law reads, “Any road organizer who do not immediately and appropriately repair damaged roads which cause such traffic accidents as referred to in Article 24 paragraph (1) resulting in minor injuries and/or damage to vehicles and/or goods shall be punished with imprisonment of a maximum of 6 (six) months or penalty of a maximum of Rp12,000,000 (twelve million rupiah).”

Legal counsel Viktor Santoso Tandiasa expressed the Petitioner’s argument that the norm could potentially lead to legal uncertainty in determining which state administrators are subject to criminal punishment in the event of a violation. As a journalist, he often drives a vehicle above the standard speed in order to be able to get news within the deadline. The many damaged roads could lead to accidents (including for the Petitioner).

The Petitioner alleged that the phrase in the norm does not provide legal certainty for investigators, especially in assessing the time used as a measure in reports on accidents, due to the damaged roads. If reports submitted to investigators cannot be processed, that the public cannot ask for accountability when they experience an accident due to damaged roads.

“Therefore, it is clear and actual that the provision of the a quo norm have caused constitutional harm to the Petitioner and, according to according to logical reasoning, it is inevitable to the Petitioner. The Petitioner could experience constitutional impairment because with the enactment of the provision, he would not obtain legal guarantee, protection, and fair legal certainty and equal treatment before the law as guaranteed in Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution,” Viktor explained before Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo (panel chair), Saldi Isra, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.

The Petitioner requested that the Court grant the entire petition and declare Article 273 paragraph (1) of the LLAJ Law along the phrase ‘who do not immediately and appropriately repair damaged roads’ conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted “who have received a report on any damaged road and do not take action to repair the damaged road within 10 days.”

Justices’ Advice

In response to the petition, Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra questioned the petition’s rationale to state that an accident caused by a damaged road could potentially harm his constitutional rights. Despite damage to the road, the driver can be more careful. Accidents can occur in various conditions, even on good toll roads. Therefore, the Petitioner should make an argument to persuade the Court to revise the norms. Justice Saldi also asked the Petitioner to revisit the Court Decision No. 3/PUU-XI/2013, which was referred to for a measure for criminal punishments related to the issue in this case.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh urged the Petitioner to look into accidents cause by damaged roads, for example data from official institutions stating the number of accidents caused by damaged roads. He also advised the Petitioner to include data on state administrators’ (local governments) compensation in the event of accidents.

Next, Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo observed that it was important for the Petitioner to explain the rationale of the 10-day time limit he requested norm. He asked whether if the accident occurs before the 10-day period, state administrators would be free from responsibility over the accident. “Therefore, it is necessary to reconsider the time limit,” he said.

Before concluding the session, Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo announced that the Petitioner was given 14 workdays to revise the petition and to submit it no later than Monday, October 31, 2022 at 13:30 WIB to the Registrar’s Office.

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

Translation uploaded on 10/19/2022 15:33 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.

---