The Petitioner’s legal counsel Risky Kurniawan conveying arguments to challenge the authority to petition for the disbandment of political parties in the Constitutional Court Law, Monday (2/12/2024). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held a judicial review hearing of Article 68 paragraph (1) of Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court as amended by Law No. 7 of 2020 on the Third Amendment to Law No. 24 of 2003 on Monday, February 12, 2024. The case No. 16/PUU-XXII/2024 was filed by the Batam International University student Albert Ola Masan Setiawan Muda.

Article 68 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law reads, “The petitioner shall be the Government.” The Petitioner believes it to be unconstitutional.

Through legal counsel Risky Kurniawan, the Petitioner alleged that political parties play an important role and have a crucial position in the democratic system. They also serve as a highly strategic hub between government processes and the citizens. Pursuant to Article 29 of the Political Party Law, any individual citizens must be recruited by political parties in order to run as presidential and vice-presidential candidates in the election, which is the manifestation of the right to vote and whose implementation must be honest, fair, and democratic.

The Petitioner feels harmed and restricted from exercising the right to request the ban of parties whose leaders and members have been involved in corruption cases while in public office. Should those cases justify the ban of the political parties in question, a question arose: what if those parties are part of the Government and the president?

The Petitioner alleges that restricting citizens from being able to dissolve political parties and allowing the government to do so imply abuse of power, where certain individuals or corporations could benefit from. Thus, it could potentially violate Article (1) paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. For that reason, the Petitioner requests that citizens can petition for the dissolution of political parties that are involved in corruption.

He requests that the Court declare Article 68 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “The petitioner shall be the Government or individual Indonesian citizens.”

“The Constitutional Court can hand down a ruling as [positive legislator] for justice, urgent situations, and to avoid legal chaos in society. Consequently, in order to ensure an honest and fair election, the Government may dissolve corrupt parties before election,” Rizky said.

Justices’ Advice

Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh advised the Petitioner to relate the a quo article to the 1945 Constitution and present any international conventions that can affirm his argument. He also recommended that the posita be supplemented with an alternative petitum.

Next, Constitutional Justice Ridwan Mansyur advised the Petitioner to provide references on international cases relating to the issue to elaborate the background.

“You should compare [the petition] with previous petitions already filed to the Court and dig deep, so that upon comparison, the differences will be apparent, in terms of both the background and touchstone. This is so that the Court can change its stance in previous cases,” he said.

Meanwhile, Chief Justice Suhartoyo said the Petitioner should improve the closing part of the elaboration of the Court’s authority to follow the standard format of the petition. He also advised the Petitioner to describe factual and potential impairment caused by the enforcement of the norm being petitioned.

Before the hearing concluded, Chief Justice Suhartoyo announced that the Petitioners would have 14 days to revise the petition and submit it by submit it to the Registrar’s Office by February 26, 2024 at 09:00 WIB.  

Author       : Sri Pujianti
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.

---