Material Review Hearing on Job Creation Law Delayed until Formal Review Ruling
Image

Said Salahudin, the legal counsel of the Labor Party, at the formal and material judicial review hearing of the stipulation of Perppu No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation into law, Wednesday (6/21/2023). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.


JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) handed down another decree to separate the formal and material review of Law No. 6 of 2023 on the Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perppu) No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation into Law on Wednesday, June 21, 2023.

Chief Justice Anwar Usman revealed that on April 6 the Court had received petitions No. 39/PUU-XXI/2023 took by ten workers’ unions, including the workers’ union of the state-owned electricity company PT Perusahaan Listrik Negara (Persero) or SP PLN, the workers’ union of Indonesia Power or PP IP, the workers’ union of PT Pembangkitan Jawa Bali, and 109 individuals and No. 49/PUU-XXI/2023 by the Indonesia Halal Watch.

Chief Justice Anwar explained that following Article 34 of the Constitutional Court Law, the Court had held panel examination hearings for case No. 39/PUU-XXI/2023 on May 8 and 22 and for case No. 49/PUU-XXI/2023 on May 17 and 31. The Court had ruled in Decision No. 79/PUU-XVII/2019 at a public hearing on May 4, 2021 that “the examination for the formal and material review can be split if the Petitioner combines those two in 1 (one) petition….”

He further explained that at an open plenary pronouncement hearing of Decision No. 25/PUU-XX/2022 on the judicial review of Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital City on July 20, 2022, the Court declared that the deadline for the examination of a formal petition is 60 (sixty) workdays since the president and/or the House testify at a plenary examination hearing.

“Based on the elaboration in letters d and e, and because the a quo cases are substantially more complex, there needs to be separation between the formal and material review for case No. 40/PUU-XXI/2023 and a delay of the material review, since the judgment of the constitutionality of laws materially is highly dependent on whether or not the formal petition is proven. Therefore, the material review for cases No. 39/PUU-XXI/2023 and 49/PUU-XXI/2023 also need to be delayed,” Chief Justice Anwar said.

He further said that at a justice deliberation meeting on June 6, the Court had decided to separate the formal and material review for case No. 40/PUU-XXI/2023 and delayed the material review for cases No. 39/PUU-XXI/2023, No. 40/PUU-XXI/2023, and 49/PUU-XXI/2023 until a formal review decision is pronounced by the Court.

“[The Court] orders the Constitutional Court chief registrar to record the matter as referred to in letter g in the electronic constitutional case registration book (e-BRPK); declares the delay of the material examination of cases No. 39/PUU-XXI/2023, No. 40/PUU-XXI/2023, and 49/PUU-XXI/2023; order the Constitutional Court chief registrar to record the separation of the formal and material review of case No. 40/PUU-XXI/2023 and the delay of the examination of the material review of cases No. 39/PUU-XXI/2023, No. 40/PUU-XXI/2023, and 49/PUU-XXI/2023 in the electronic constitutional case registration book (e-BRPK),” Chief Justice Anwar emphasized.

At the same hearing, the Court also decreed the delay of the examination of case No. 50/PUU-XXI/2023 because the President and the House were not prepared to testify. “The next hearing will take place on Thursday, July 6, 2023 at 11:00 WIB to hear the House and the President because they are not prepared to testify today,” he said from the plenary courtroom.

Also read:

PLN Workers’ Unions Challenge Job Creation Law

PLN Workers’ Unions Affirm Legal Standing in Case on Job Creation Law

Court Reviews Constitutionality of Two Halal Certification Institutions

Indonesia Halal Watch Revises Petition on Dualism of Halal Certification Institutions

Labor Party Asks Court to Annul Job Creation Law 

Labor Party Adds Evidence for Formal Petition of Job Creation Law 

The Petitioners of case No. 39/PUU-XXI/2023 argued that the a quo Law regulates the supply of electricity for public interest to be unbundling. Meanwhile, the Petitioner of case No. No. 49/PUU-XXI/2023 alleged that the amendments to the articles in the a quo Law had harmed them.

In case No. 50/PUU-XXI/2023, the Labor Party argued that the stipulation of the Job Creation Law, which is not in line with the Constitutional Court Decision No. 91/PUU-XVIII/2020 and Article 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, which stresses that Indonesia is a rule of law. The president and House’s disregard of the Court’s decision was clearly in violation of the principle of a rule of law, which dictates that all state institutions, including the legislatures, comply with and abide by the law and the Constitution, including the final and binding decision of the Constitutional Court.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        :
Nur R.
PR            : Tiara Agustina
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.


Wednesday, June 21, 2023 | 16:42 WIB 164