Leonardo Siahaan, the Petitioner, conveying revisions to the petition at the panel hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code, Wednesday (5/10/2023). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — A petition revision hearing for the judicial review of provisions on criminal punishment for insulting the state emblem as referred to in Article 237 letter c of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code (KUHP) was held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Wednesday, May 10, 2023 in the plenary courtroom. Leonardo Siahaan and Ricky Donny Lamhot Marpaung filed the petition No. 36/PUUXXI/2023. They also challenge Article 100 paragraph (1), Article 256, and Article 237 letter c of the Criminal Code.

The Petitioner, who attended the hearing, conveyed several revisions to the petition including the change in his arguments and addition of subheading that the Court has revoked a law whose implementation was pending. He also added several articles, i.e. Article 100 paragraph (1) and Article 256 of the Criminal Code.

“We made a table on page 8, Your Honor, which shows that the Constitutional Court Decision No. 110/PUU-X/2012 on [the Juvenile Justice System (SPPA) Law], which was at the time not in effect yet or was pending for two years. However, [the Court] then declared it unconstitutional,” he said to the panel chaired by Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo.

Also read: Previously Annulled Punishment for Insulting State Emblem Challenged

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner asserted that Article 237 letter c of the Criminal Code was similar to Article 57 letter d of the Criminal Code that the Court had annulled. He believes that the article shows the Government’s non-compliance with the Constitutional Court Decision No. 4/PUU-X/2012.

He argued that the articles are exactly the same, but ironically Article 57, which has been declared unconstitutional, was somehow re-enacted and re-incorporated into the Criminal Code in Article 237. This indicates that the Government did not comply with the Constitutional Court’s decision or, in short, the Court’s decision was considered a mere formality, so the Government did not implement the Decision No. 4/PUU-X/2012. It is very ironic that the Government did not recognize or implement the decision and incorporated it into the Criminal Code.

The Petitioner also takes issue with the criminal punishment for those who protest without a permit as stated in Article 256 of the Criminal Code. The Petitioners believe that the article has caused potential harm and threatened freedom of expression as guaranteed in Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution. He then requested that the Court declare Article 100, Article 237 letter c, and Article 256 of the Criminal Code unconstitutional and not legally binding.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Andhini S. F.
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.

---