Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat chairing the petition revision hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 14 of 2005 on Teachers and Lecturers, Thursday (12/8/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

Thursday, December 8, 2022 | 10:52 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held the second material judicial review of Law No. 14 of 2005 on Teachers and Lecturers on Thursday, December 8, 2022 in the panel courtroom. At the petition revision hearing, Gunawan A. Tuada and Abdul Kadir B., civil servants (PNS) at the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology conveyed the revisions to the petition.

Abdul said the background to the petition had been revised, especially on the conditional unconstitutionality of the a quo article, since the ground for temporary suspension of professional allowances for lecturers/instructors who are pursuing further studies or of lecturer certification allowance. The Petitioners believe this relates to the potential impairment due to the policy on lecturer allowances, despite them bearing teaching workload. Meanwhile, according to the Regulation of the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology, employed lecturers should receive lecturer certification allowance.

Next, Gunawan conveyed the argument that the a quo article has been interpreted arbitrarily by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology and, thus, is in violation of Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. “So, the [Ministry of Education, Culture, Research, and Technology] and the Ministry of Religious Affairs have different interpretations of the article. The Ministry of Religious Affairs bases the lecturer certification allowance on the same Law, while the Ministry of Education does not give the allowance. Thus, there is misinterpretation or multiple interpretations of the same norm,” he said before Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat, Wahiduddin Adams, and Manahan M. P. Sitompul.

He added that Article 51 paragraph (1) Teacher-Lecturer Law along the phrase “in carrying out professional duties” is in violation of Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution because it results in multiple interpretations by policymakers. In short, the article results in the inequality among lecturers who are taking study leave domestically or overseas. Therefore, the Petitioners requested that the Court grant the petition.

Also read: Suspension of Certification Allowance for Studying Lecturers Questioned

The Petitioners of case No. 111/PUU-XX/202 revealed a concrete case in which the a quo article was implemented as temporary suspension of payment of professional allowances for lecturers from 2009 to 2022. As a result, the Petitioners lost their financial rights while pursuing further studies at a number of higher education institutions in Indonesia while taking study leave. This interpretation is not based on the best interests of lecturers taking study leave, especially those who are currently or will be pursuing further studies at their own expenses entirely or partially or on a scholarship even though they still have some workload for their position. Ideally, as long as they have workload for their lecturing position, they deserve lecturer certification allowances.

Therefore, the Petitioners requested that the Court grant the petition and declare Article 51 paragraph (1) of the Teacher-Lecturer Law along the phrase “in carrying out professional duties” unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted to mean “in carrying out professional duties, also includes lecturers taking study leave.”

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

Translation uploaded on 12/8/2022 14:31 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.

---