Chief Justice Suhartoyo opening a hearing on the judicial review of Law No. 9 of 2010 on Protocol, Monday (09/09/2024). Photo by PR/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA, HUMAS MKRI—The judicial hearing on the judicial review of Article 16 letter a of Law No. 9 of 2010 on Protocol (Protocol Law) against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia was held on Monday, September 9, 2024. Pranoto and Dwi Agung filed Case No. 66/PUU-XXII/2024.

This session was supposed to hear testimony from the DPR and the President. However, the DPR and the Government said they could not attend.

“Today's hearing agenda is to hear testimony from the DPR and the president. The House of Representatives is not yet present, and the summons will be scheduled again. From the President, who will read out?” asked Chief Justice Suhartoyo in the hearing held in the Panel Courtroom.

In response to the Chief Justice's question, the Government, represented by Surdianto, apologized because it was not possible to present an official to read the President's statement. This was due to the short time constraints.

“Actually, on Thursday, we already had an official to read out, then on Friday, he gave us news that he could not read out because he was called by the Minister today. It was not only him but all expert staff,” said Surdianto.

“The reading of the hearing must be read by an official of at least echelon 1. Thus, the Court tries to give (the opportunity) once again ... and reschedule it for postponement on September 30, 2024 at 10.30 WIB. The agenda is to hear the testimony of the DPR and the President. There will be no further adjournment because the Petitioner will wait for a speedy trial,” Chief Justice Suhartoyo said.

 Also read:

History Enthusiast and Teacher Review Protocol Law

History Enthusiast Revises Petition on Protocol Law

DPR Absent and Government Unprepared, Court Postpones Hearing of Protocol Law Review

Petitioners felt harmed due to discrepancies between phrases in the Protocol Law and existing facts. “The Protocol Law stated that August 17, 1945, was Indonesia's independence day. Meanwhile, based on history, August 17, 1945, was the independence day or the birth of the Indonesian Nation; if one must mention the Independence of the state of Indonesia, it should be on August 18, 1945. From there, during flag ceremonies, the mention of August 17, 1945, as Indonesia’s Independence Day disadvantaged petitioners,” Singgih explained as petitioners’ legal counsel.

Petitioners also emphasized that the error was also reflected in the Government Circular Letter regarding the Commemoration of the Anniversary of the Republic of Indonesia on August 17. By changing the phrase “The Independence of the Republic of Indonesia” to “The Independence of the Indonesian Nations” in Article 16 letter a, Article 18, and Article 20 of Protocol Law, Petitioners hope that their constitutional rights and duties can be fully fulfilled, so that the national education system can function as intended, and the Government can be more careful in issuing Circular Letters regarding commemoration of national holidays.

For that reason, on the petitum, the petitioners ask the Court to accept and grant the Petitioners’ petition in its entirety, to declare Article 16 letter a, Article 18, and Article 20 of Protocol Law so far as the phrase “the Independence of the Republic of Indonesia” contradicts the 1945 Constitution and has no legally binding power.

Author: Utami Argawati.

Editor: N. Rosi

PR: Fauzan F.

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.

---