A lecturer and advocate, Rega Felix, as a petitioner of judicial review of Article 72 paragraph (5) of Law No. 12 of 2012 on Higher Education (Higher Education Law), Monday (26/8/2024), at a panel courtroom. Photo by MKRI/Panji

---

Jakarta, MKRI—On Monday, August 26, 2024, the Constitutional Court held a preliminary judicial review hearing of case No. 109/PUU-XXII/2024 regarding Article 72 paragraph (5) of Law No. 12 of 2012 on Higher Education (Higher Education Law). The petition was filed by a lecturer and advocate, Rega Felix.

Article 72 paragraph (5) of the Higher Education Law states, “The Minister may appoint a person with extraordinary competence at the level of academic position of professor at the proposal of the Higher Education Institution.”

Explaining his legal position in this case, the Petitioner expressed his moral responsibility to fight for the honor and dignity of the lecturer's profession through the Constitutional Court. This is considered by the Petitioner a form of implementing his knowledge and oath.

Furthermore, the Petitioner states that the phrase “extraordinary competence” needs to be interpreted constitutionally by the Court. The applicant also emphasized that he did not deny the existence of non-academic persons with “extraordinary competence,” as stipulated in the article. However, the Petitioner argues that this needs to be proven academically and can be tested through real work, not just based on “fame” or “position”.

Furthermore, the article is considered by the Petitioner as an instantaneous path that should have similar requirements to the position of full professor according to Article 49 paragraph (3) of the Higher Education Law. The Petitioner believes that this requirement reflects fairness, where a person who becomes a professor with “extraordinary competence” needs to prove his/her specialty.

“The term ‘extraordinary competence’ must be given minimum limitation through constitutional interpretation. Do not let universities arbitrarily propose professorships, and ministers appoint them arbitrarily. When the meaning of the norm of the law is vague, the norm of the implementing rules can be interpreted arbitrarily until finally, the sale of professorships is possible. Hence, it is clear that the norm of Article 72 paragraph (5) of the Higher Education Law is conditionally unconstitutional against the provision of Article 28G paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution because it can degrade the dignity and honor of lecturers as a noble profession,” he explained.

Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioner asked the Court to declare Article 72 paragraph (5) of the Higher Education Law unconstitutional as long as it is not interpreted as “The Minister may appoint a person with extraordinary competence as evidenced by scientific works or other monumental works that are very special in their fields and have international recognition at the level of academic position of professor at the proposal of the Higher Education Institution.”

Justices’ Advice

Responding to the Petitioner's petition, Justice Enny Nurbaningsih advised the Petitioner to emphasize his legal standing. “You strengthen the legal standing part. Is it true that you are a lecturer, what is the evidence? Then you elaborate on whether if it is related to the norm that is submitted for review, then the enactment of this norm is your constitutional right given by the basic law that you feel there is a loss there. Which right is it, the constitutional right granted by the Constitution. Is it Article 28G paragraph (1) or another. You must be able to elaborate,” Justice Enny explained.

Before concluding the hearing, the panel of Judges gave the Petitioner 14 days to revise his petition. The revision must be received by the Court on Monday, September 9, at 15.00 Western Indonesian Time at the latest.

Author: Utami Argawati.

Editor: N. Rosi.

PR: Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina.

Translator: Rizky Kurnia Chaesario (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.

 

---