Chief Justice Suhartoyo and Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat at the ruling hearing for the judicial review of Law No. 24 of 2009 on the National Flag, Language, Emblem, and Anthem, Wednesday (1/31/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) declared the judicial review petition of Law No. 24 of 2009 on the National Flag, Language, Emblem, and Anthem (BBLNLK Law) by Artiningkun, a retired state civil apparatus (ASN) of the Bojonegoro Regency Office of Religious Affairs, inadmissible. The ruling hearing for Decision No. 161/PUU-XXI/2023 on Wednesday, January 31, 2024 was presided over by Chief Justice Suhartoyo and the other constitutional justices.

In its legal opinion, delivered by Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat, the Court stated that the petition was filed on November 2, 2023 and received by the Registrar’s Office on November 10. The Court held a preliminary hearing to hear the petition on December 19, 2023, where the panel of justices advised the Petitioner to clarify the posita and revise the petitum. It held the second hearing on January 17, 2024.

After listening to the Petitioner’s explanation, the Court assessed that an elaboration in the posita had been repetitive, thus obscuring the petition’s focus, and in turn making the posita difficult to understand. In addition, the petition’s format was unusual and the petitum was not detailed following the posita. The petitum did not mention the contradiction between Article Article 25 paragraph (1) of the BBLNLK Law and the 1945 Constitution.

“Although the Court had the authority to adjudicate the Petitioner’s petition and the Petitioner had the legal standing to act as a petitioner, the Petitioner’s petition was obscure, so the Court did not consider the subject matter,” Justice Arief emphasized.

Also read:

Old Spelling Still Listed, BBLNLK Law Challenged

ASN Retiree Revises Reason Against Old Spelling in BBLNLK Law

At the preliminary hearing on Tuesday, December 19, 2023, the Petitioner argued that the article’s interpretation of the Indonesian language had discredited or weakened the nation’s authority since the variation still uses the Van Ophuijsen spelling used by Dutch people, also known as bahasa Melayu (Malay). She believed that, as a result, the norm had become a made-up law that contradicts the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, she requested that the Court declare it unconstitutional.

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
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.

---