Rega Felix reading out the petition’s subject matter at the preliminary hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Assurance, Wednesday (2/22/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.
Wednesday, February 22, 2023 | 17:42 WIB
JAKARTA (MKRI) — Rega Felix, owner of culinary business “Felix Burger,” challenges Article 34 paragraph (2) of Law No. 33 of 2014 on Halal Product Assurance (JPH) and Article 48 points 19-20 of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu) No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation, which contain amendment to Article 33 paragraph (5) and Article 33A paragraph (1) of the JPH Law. The preliminary hearing for case No. 18/PUU-XXI/2023 took place in the Constitutional Court (MK) on Wednesday, February 22, 2023. The hearing was presided over by Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (panel chair), Wahiduddin Adams, and Saldi Isra.
Article 34 paragraph (2) of the JPH Law reads, “In case the Halal Fatwa Assembly as intended in Article 33 paragraph (2) declared the Product not halal, BPJPH returns the Halal Certificate application to the Business Operator along with the reason.”
Article 48 point 19 of the Job Creation Perppu reads, “In the event that the time limit referred to in paragraph (3) is exceeded, the determination of product halalness is carried out by the halal product fatwa committee based on the provisions of the halal fatwa.”
Article 48 point 20 of the Job Creation Perppu reads, “In the event that the application for halal certification is carried out by micro- and small business actors through a halal statement, the determination of product halalness is carried out by the halal product fatwa committee based on the provisions of the halal fatwa.”
At the hearing, the Petitioner revealed that many customers questioned the halalness of his culinary business’ burger and hotdog. He then tried to apply for a halal certification. However, one of the condition for the Halal Assurance System 23000 (HAS 23000) is “The brand/name of product cannot use any name that refers to something that is declared haram or to any type of worship that is not in line with Islamic sharia.”
The Petitioner believes that the halal fatwa cannot be challenged despite its subjectivity, so there could be double standards on how a brand/name of product can be interpreted as halal or haram, thus leading to different interpretations of a brand/product name. Not to mention, the Job Creation Perppu mentions a new institution, the Halal Product Fatwa Committee, outside of the Indonesian Ulema Council (MUI), whose halal fatwa has met the requirements as a state administrative decree.
“Therefore, the decentralization of authority in the Job Creation Perppu would potentially lead to new legal issues. Therefore, there should be clear interpretation of the institution, process, and legal avenues for resolving halal disputes in order to create fair legal certainty for businesspeople and society,” said the Petitioner, who is an advocate.
In the petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare Article 34 paragraph (2) of the JPH Law unconstitutional and not legally binding conditionally if not interpreted “halal fatwa that declares a product not halal can be challenged legally through the Religious Court;” declare Article 48 point 19 of the Job Creation Perppu, which contains amendment to Article 33 paragraph (5) of the JPH Law, unconstitutional and not legally binding conditionally if not interpreted “the decision of the Halal Product Fatwa Committee can be challenged legally through the Religious Court;” Article 48 point 20 of the Job Creation Perppu, which contains amendment to Article 33A paragraph (1) of the JPH Law, unconstitutional and not legally binding conditionally if not interpreted “the decision of the Halal Product Fatwa Committee can be challenged legally through the Religious Court.”
Justices’ Advice
In response to the petition, Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams cautioned the Petitioner in relation to the object being petitioned, since it is in the Job Creation Perppu. This, he said, would greatly influence the subject matter. He observed that the Petitioner questioned the decentralized fatwa-issuing authority with the regional MUI authority but he had not elaborated on this. Instead, he touched more on the naming of products that have non-halal/haram element.
“So, the key issue has not been explained. It must be affirmed by elaborating on the touchstone, the argument on the subject matter, and then the MUI’s fatwa-issuing authority is mentioned in the petitum. What is the [correlation]? So, the object needs supporting arguments,” he said.
Next, Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra talked about the Petitioner’s view of the expansion of the Religious Court’s jurisdiction and the decentralization of halal products, given that the Petitioner alleged that different institutions that issue fatwa on halal product assurance have different perceptions.
“Decentralization does not mean [institution] is left to its own devices, but the MUI has authority to make correction. The Petitioner must consider this. Then, the coherence and correlation between the claim of constitutional impairment and the background in the Constitution [must be reviewed]. The Petitioner also needs to mention models where the judiciary is authorized to deal with appeals,” he said.
Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat observed the substandard format of the petition, the legislation hierarchy, and the institution having jurisdiction over the case, the Constitutional Court’s jurisdiction, the constitutional impairment, and the petitum. He advised the Petitioner to pay more attention to the articles petitioned and his arguments, so that the Court could be convinced of those arguments.
Before adjourning the session, Justice Arief announced that the Petitioner had until Tuesday, March 7 at 13:30 WIB to submit the revised petition. The Court’s Registrar’s Office would then announce the schedule for the second hearing.
Author : Sri Pujianti
Editor : Nur R.
PR : Andhini S. F.
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 2/24/2023 20:22 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.
Wednesday, February 22, 2023 | 17:42 WIB 320