Hotma Sitorus, an expert presented by the Government at the judicial review hearing of Law No. 11 of 2021 on the Amendment to Law No. 16 of 2004 on Prosecution, Thursday (11/10/2022). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

Thursday, November 10, 2022 | 13:50 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held another judicial review hearing for Law No. 11 of 2021 on the Amendment to Law No. 16 of 2004 on Prosecution on Thursday, November 10, 2022. The hearing for case No. 70/PUU-XX/2022 had been set to hear the Government’s expert.

Before Chief Justice Anwar Usman and the other constitutional justices, the Government’s expert Hotman Sitorus said that uniform substance is crucial to review whether the norm being petitioned is against the touchstone. If the substance is not found in the 1945 Constitution, what is being reviewed is not a matter of constitutionality but the legislators’ open legal policy.

“The classification of prosecutors’ ages in the a quo case does not concern the substance of a rule of law, of legal certainty, of discrimination, or of equality before the law, thus concerns an open legal policy,” he said.

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 

Change of Retirement Age of Public Prosecutors Affects Family’s Finances 

Govt Delays Expert Testimonies at Hearing for 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 11/14/2022 07:53 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.

---