Legal counsel Leonardo Siahaan reading out the subject matter at the panel preliminary hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 2 of 2011 on Political Parties, Tuesday (7/11/2023). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held the preliminary hearing of the material judicial review of Article 23 paragraph (1) of Law No. 2 of 2011 on the Amendment to Law No. 2 of 2008 on Political Parties on Tuesday, July 11, 2023 in the plenary courtroom. The case No. 69/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by Eliadi Hulu and Saiful Salim (Petitioners I-II). Petitioner I was a chairman of a campus organization while Petitioner II is the chairman of the Indonesian Legal Student Association (Permahi) of 2021-2023.
The Petitioners challenge Article 23 paragraph (1) of the Political Party Law, which reads, “The replacement of political party officials at each level shall be conducted in accordance with the Statute and Bylaws of the political party.”
Before the panel chaired by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, legal counsel Leonardo Siahaan said that Indonesia is a rule of law, so the tenure of chairpersons of political parties must be clearly regulated since political parties are central organizations that reflect democracy and are pillars of democracy.
He argued there is no legal certainty in a party’s articles of association of the term limits of the party’s chairperson. Ideally and based on general precedent, an organization’s chairperson be given a term of five years and a one-time reelection for the same position, either consecutively or not.
The Petitioners believe the provision has harmed their constitutional rights. They have chaired organizations and believe they have good leadership and management abilities, so they want to join political party in Indonesia.
The absence of term limits for political party leaders causes damage to the internal democratic system and power abuse over political party members, as well as closing the space for members’ participation in policy- or decision-making. If the Petitioners join one of the political parties, they will certainly lose their right to express opinions. So much power in the hands of the chairman leads to authoritarianism and dynasties within political parties. Clear evidence can be seen in the determination of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan), which is only determined by its chairperson.
“Currently, political parties have reflected a public unrest, as we know today—internal chaos and so on. Moreover, many party chairpersons have not been replaced until now, such as in PDI-P and the Democratic Party, which until now have unconsciously shown long-standing power to the people, especially since the two parties or other political parties have a lot of supporters,” Siahaan explained.
Furthermore, he explained, the Petitioners have legal standing where one of the most important elements in political parties is the contribution of the state budget, to which tax contributes. “Some people are eager for the regeneration of political parties, that is why the people and the public do not question and it is appropriate and natural to demand political parties who do not limit the chairperson’s term to be [reorganized],” he said.
Based on these arguments, in the petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Court declare Article 23 paragraph (1) of the Political Party Law unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as it is not interpreted as “The regeneration of political party management at each level is carried out in accordance with the articles of association, specifically the chairperson or any other designation, the articles of association must regulate the term of office for 5 (five) years and a 1 (one) time reelection in the same position, either consecutively or not.”
Justices’ Advice
In response, Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah requested that the Petitioners prove their legal standing. “Please study more [to prove] your legal standing. This petition also needs rearranging,” he said.
Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh agreed that the Petitioners must elaborate their legal standing. “Elaborate it to… convince the justices of your legal standing,” he said.
He added that the Petitioners could elaborate their arguments on the term limit for party chairpersons better. “Please elaborate the Petitioners’ constitutional impairment,” he said.
Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra also advised the Petitioners on their legal standing. The key is that the impairment is potential and according to logical reasoning is inevitable. “So, provide proof that [the impairment] is inevitable. This you have not explain at all,” he said.
Before adjourning the session, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra announced that the Petitioner had 14 workdays to revise the petition and to submit it to the Registrar’s Office by Monday, July 24 at 10:00 WIB.
Author : Utami Argawati
Editor : Nur R.
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.
Tuesday, July 11, 2023 | 15:44 WIB 181