The preliminary hearing of the judicial review of the Lawmaking Law for case No. 8/PUU-XXI/2023, Tuesday (1/24/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ilham W. M.
Tuesday, January 24, 2023 | 15:12 WIB
JAKARTA (MKRI) — Several activists affiliated with Langkah Juang Pemulihan Kedaulatan Rakyat (“Steps to the Recovery of the People’s Sovereignty”) filed a material judicial review petition of Law No. 12 of 2011 on Lawmaking to the Constitutional Court (MK). The Petitioners of the case No. 8/PUU-XXI/2023—Trijono Hardjono, Muhammad Afif Syairozi, Salyo Kinasih Bumi, Hendrikus Rara Lunggi, Muhammad Fajar Ar Rozo, Abdul Ghofur, and Frederikus Patu—challenged Article 7 paragraph (1) letter b and its elucidation as well as Article 18 letter b and its elucidation. The preliminary hearing for the case took place at the panel courtroom on Tuesday, January 24, 2023 before presiding Constitutional Justices M. Guntur Hamzah, Manahan M. P. Sitompul, and Enny Nurbaningsih.
Article 7 paragraph (1) letter b of the Lawmaking Law reads, “Types and hierarchy of Legislation are as follows: b. the Decision of the People’s Consultative Assembly,” while its elucidation reads, “that is still valid as referred to in Article 2 and Article 4….” Article 18 letter b reads, “The preparation of list of draft Laws in the Prolegnas as referred to in Article 16 is based on: b. the mandate of the Decision of the People's Consultative Assembly,” while its elucidation reads, “that is still valid as referred to in Article 2 and Article 4….”
Through Trijono Hardjono, the Petitioners asserted that they would like to return the people’s sovereignty to the hands of the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR), who they believe merely functions as a bridge between the House of Representatives (DPR) and the Regional Representatives Council (DPD) after the amendment to the 1945 Constitution. They also believe that the restriction on the application of the MPR’s decision in the preparation of the Prolegnas (National Legislative Program) following Article 18 letter b of the Lawmaking Law has led to legal uncertainty because it has been stripped of constitutional authority over legal products.
“The Petitioners request that the Court declare the manuscript of the Constitution by the Investigating Committee for Preparatory Works for Independence on August 18, 1945 valid temporarily as the legal basis for the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia; declare the state administration, the House, and the DPD temporarily valid; and [validate] the regional government and the DPRD resulting from the 2019 Election,” Trijono said reading out a petitum of the Petitioners.
Justices’ Advice
Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih advised the Petitioners to revise the petition following the standard format and to read past decisions and refer to the qualifications of the petitioners. “More importantly, there are five requirements of constitutional impairment, which are not mentioned in this petition at all. If this is not clear, the [case would be inadmissible due to formal defects],” she explained.
Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul advised the Petitioners to observe the Constitutional Court Regulation No. 2 of 2021, especially Articles 8-10 on the format of formal and material petitions. He also urged them to have a consultation with anyone who are familiar with the Court’s procedural law and the petition.
“Legislative hierarchy is related to the authority of other institutions. Is this an issue of the norm? The Court concerns with the constitutionality of norms. In order to avoid [dismissal due to formal defects], the Petitioners should review the petition once more,” he said.
Next, Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah advised the Petitioners to explain the norms petitioned and the touchstones and criticized the unusual format of the petitum. “This is to avoid [dismissal due to formal defects], so revisions must be done until the petition is clear,” he said.
Before concluding the hearing, Justice Guntur informed the Petitioners that they had until Monday, February 6 at 11:00 WIB to revise the petition. The Registrar’s Office would then schedule the second hearing and inform them of it.
Writer : Sri Pujianti
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR : Andhini S. F.
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 1/26/2023 11:50 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.
Tuesday, January 24, 2023 | 15:12 WIB 284