Chief Justice Anwar Usman reading out the decree of the judicial review of Law No. 12 of 1980 on the Financial Rights of the Chairperson and Members of High State Institutions, Monday (10/31/2022). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

Monday, October 31, 2022 | 15:20 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The Constitutional Court (MK) granted the withdrawal of a judicial review petition of Law No. 12 of 1980 on the Financial/Administrative Rights of Chairpersons and Members of Highest/High State Institutions and Former Chairpersons and Members of Highest/High State Institutions on Monday, October 31, 2022. The petition No. 94/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by Ahmad Agus Rianto, a driver of online motorcycle taxi (ojek) from Selopuro Subdistrict, Blitar Regency.

Reading out the Decree No. 94/PUU-XX/2022, Chief Justice Anwar Usman said that following the Constitutional Court Law, the Court had held a preliminary panel examination hearing on the petition on September 28, 2022. Following Article 39 of the Constitutional Court Law, the justice panel had advised the Petitioner to revise the petition.

However, on October 12, the Court’s Registrar’s Office received a letter from the Petitioner asking to withdraw the petition. At a justice deliberation meeting (RPH) on October 18, the justices had decided that the withdrawal request was legally reasonable. The Petitioner cannot re-file the a quo petition. The Court ordered the Chief Registrar to record the petition withdrawal in the electronic constitutional case registration book (e-BRPK) and to return the petition documents to the Petitioner.

“[The Court] grants the withdrawal of the Petitioners’ petition,” said Chief Justice Anwar Usman

Also read:

Online Motorcycle Taxi Driver Challenges Provision on State Official’s Pension

Online Motorcycle Taxi Driver Withdraws Petition on State Officials’ Pension

The Petitioner challenged Article 12 paragraphs (1) and (2); Article 13 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3); Article 14 paragraphs (1) and (2); Article 15; Article 16 paragraphs (1), (2), and (3); Article 17 paragraph (1), (2), (3), (4), and (5); Article 18 paragraphs (1) and (2); Article 19 paragraphs (1), (2), (3), and (4); Article 20; and Article 21 of Law No. 12 of 1980, which regulate pension for chairpersons and members of high state institutions, from requirements to payment mechanism.

He asserted that the Court had ruled a similar case with Decision No. 41/PUU-XI/2013. However, he emphasized that his petition was different. He believed the articles to be detrimental to him because the retribution and taxes he paid should be used to improve basic public services and for the construction of public infrastructure that is beneficial to the community. It would be more appropriate for these pension funds to be diverted to education and health, which would be more beneficial for the welfare of the people and in accordance with Article 23 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, he argued.

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

Translation uploaded on 10/31/2022 21:43 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.

---