The material judicial review hearing of Articles 1-95 of Law No. 6 of 2014 on Village, Thursday (10/27/2022). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

Thursday, October 27, 2022 | 15:41 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the preliminary hearing of the material judicial review of Articles 1-95 of Law No. 6 of 2014 on Village on Thursday, October 27, 2022. The petition No. 102/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by village apparatuses Hendra Juanda, Wibowo Nugroho, Yuliana Efendi, Fredi Supriadi, and Utep Ruspendi.

At the hearing presided over by Constitutional Justices Saldi Isra (panel chair), Suhartoyo, and Wahiduddin Adams, village secretary Hendra Juanda said the petition was filed because the Village Law negatively affected the welfare of village apparatuses.

“We have been harmed a lot by this law, as does not automatically protect us village officials, as evidenced by many unilateral dismissals in various regions. We are not recognized as state apparatuses because we work in smallest government institutions in the Republic of Indonesia but until today it is still unclear whether we are ASN, employees, or PPPK [(contract-based government employees)]. Meanwhile, we have to carry out our duties as providers of public services and public goods,” Hendra said virtually to the panel of justices.

In the petition, the Petitioners argued that the enactment of the Village Law and its political policy had factually been very detrimental to them and the Indonesian people. Village apparatuses are greatly disadvantaged because they are tasked by the state to implement the law, but are not appointed as ASN (state apparatuses). Meanwhile, villagers are disadvantaged because they are not taken care of by formal government units, unlike city residents. As a result, villagers are only served by quasi-governmental organizations with incompetent and unprofessional village officials because they are not state civil servants who are recruited, developed, given career positions, paid, and discharged into retirement following Law No. 5 of 2014 on State Civil Apparatus.

In addition, villagers are discriminated against by the state. City residents, on the other hand, are managed by a formal state bureaucratic unit or the kelurahan, which has competent and professional ASN apparatuses. Hendra also said that villagers do not get public goods and/or public services from modern formal government units but from pseudo-government organizations inherited from the Japanese colonialists under the village government. As a result, villagers do not receive crucial public goods and/or basic public services such as education, health care, drinking water, sanitation, village public transportation, ID cards and family cards, public housing, waste management, agriculture (rice fields, plantations, fisheries, livestock), tertiary irrigation management, agricultural production facilities (seeds, fertilizers, medicine, agricultural tools), rural economic infrastructure, microfinance, village environmental management, village infrastructure, as well as orphanages.

Therefore, the Petitioners request that Articles 1-95 of Law No. 6 of 2014 be annulled because they contradict Article 4, Article 18, Article 18A, and Article 18B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution in conjunction with TAP MPR (People’s Consultative Assembly Decree) No. IV/2000, points [3.10.1]-[3.10.4] in conjunction with the Constitutional Court Decision No. 128/PUU-XIII/2015, and is detrimental to the constitutional rights of village officials and villagers throughout Indonesia.

Justices’ Advice

In response to the petition, Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams requested that the Petitioners detail their legal standing. “[Are you a group] of five or [five] individuals? Please elaborate. Please also elaborate the constitutional requirements appropriately and logically,” he said.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo advised the Petitioners to revise the petition’s format. “The Court’s authority, [the Petitioners’] legal standing, the background to the petition, and the petitum must be revised. Observe petitions that the Court grant. Without interfering with the Petitioners’ choice, I appeal that you reconsider the number of articles to petition. Of course not all correspond to the special constitutional impairment,” he explained.

The justice panel gave the Petitioners 14 workdays to revise the petition. They are to submit the revised petition by November 9 to the Registrar’s Office.

Writer        : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : M. Halim
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 10/27/2022 20:39 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.

---