Chief Justice Anwar Usman opening the formal judicial review hearing of Perppu No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation, Tuesday (3/28/2022). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another formal judicial review hearing of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu) No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation on Tuesday, March 28, 2023. The plenary hearing was held for both cases No. 14/PUU-XXI/2023, filed by 13 workers unions, and No. 22/PUU-XXI/2023, filed by the Alliance of Workers Unions/Labor Unions, with Chief Justice Anwar Usman, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, and the other seven constitutional justices presiding.

The hearing had been scheduled to hear the President/Government, but the Court’s Registrar’s Office had received a letter from the President’s proxy that requested a delay of the hearing. “So, this case cannot yet continue. The next hearing will take place on Tuesday, April 11, 2023 at 11:00 WIB to hear the President/Government,” said Chief Justice Anwar Usman before the litigants in the plenary courtroom.

Also read:

Workers Unions Challenge Perppu on Job Creation

Workers Unions Alliance Challenge Formation of Job Creation Perppu

Workers Unions Revise Legal Standing in Case on Job Creation Perppu

Petitioners of Job Creation Perppu Increase

The petition No. 14/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by 13 workers unions: Federasi Kesatuan Serikat Pekerja Nasional (Petitioner I), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Farmasi dan Kesehatan KSPSI (Petitioner II), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Kimia Energi dan Pertambangan KSPSI (Petitioner III), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Logam, Elektronik, dan Mesin SPSI (Petitioner IV), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Pariwisata dan Ekonomi KSPSI (Petitioner V), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Listrik Tanah Air (Pelita) Mandiri of West Kalimantan (Petitioner VI), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Pertanian dan Perkebunan (Petitioner VII), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Rakyat Indonesia (Petitioner VIII), Gabungan Serikat Buruh Indonesia (Petitioner IX), Konfederasi Buruh Merdeka Indonesia (Petitioner X), Konfederasi Serikat Pekerja Seluruh Indonesia (Petitioner XI), Persaudaraan Pekerja Muslim Indonesia (Petitioner XII), and Serikat Buruh Sejahtera Independen ’92 (Petitioner XIII).

They believe the Job Creation Perppu had not met the lawmaking provision of Article 22A of the 1945 Constitution. They alleged it a means to revive Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation, which the Court had declared conditionally unconstitutional in Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. The Job Creation Law was part of an omnibus law consisting of eleven clusters, among which serves to simplify land permits, investment requirements, manpower, provide ease and protection for MSMEs (UMKM), allow ease of business, support research and innovation, facilitate administration, facilitate sanctions, support land control, provide ease to government projects, and to manage Special Economic Zones (KEK).

The Job Creation Perppu comprises eleven combined clusters of 78 laws, such as Staatsblad of 1926 No. 226 juncto Staatsblad of 1940 No. 450 on Public Disturbance Law (Hinderordonnantie), Law No. 2 of 1981 on Legal Metrology, Law No. 32 of 1982 on Company Registration Mandate, Law No. 6 of 1973 on General Provisions of Taxation, Law No. 17 of 2019 on Water Resources, and Law No. 22 of 2019 on Sustainable Agricultural Systems.

Meanwhile, the Petitioners of case No. 22/PUU-XXI/2023 are leaders of federations and workers unions at the central level, alleged that the Job Creation Perppu had resulted in new norms that could harm their interests. They suffered impairment such as work relations that allow for long employment agreements made for unspecified period of time, the ambiguity of minimum wage, the elimination of sectoral minimum wage, the reduction of negotiation rights of workers unions, the reduction of severance pay, the ambiguity of social values, and potential conflicts due to the ambiguity of transitional provisions that regulate new norms and norms that are removed from Chapter IV on Manpower.

They also asserted that the consideration and elucidation to the Job Creation Perppu state the perppu was following up on the Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020. Legal counsel Ari Lazuardi said the Court had ordered the legislatures resolve the violations and ordered that a standard legal basis be immediately formed as a lawmaking guideline for the omnibus law. Point 4 of the verdict and the Court’s legal considerations for Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 state that the legislatures ought to make improvements to the lawmaking process Law No. 11 of 2020 on Job Creation in terms of standards, meaningful community participation, and substantial improvement of the text. However, the Job Creation Perppu proves that the President has not complied with the Court’s order in that decision. Based on those reasons and the fact that the perppu was not enacted due to a compelling crisis situation, the Petitioners appealed that the Court declare the Job Creation Perppu unconstitutional.

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

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.

---