Petitioner Masail Ishmad Mawaqif attending the preliminary judicial hearing of Law Number 18 of 2003 on Advicate, Wednesday (23/10) at the Panel Courtroom. Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

Jakarta, MKRI – Masail Ishmad Mawaqif filed a judicial review of Article 3 letter g of Law Number 18 of 2003  on Advocate (Advocate Law) against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia under Case Number 148/PUU-XXII/2024.

The preliminary hearing of the case was held on Wednesday, October 23, 2024, at the Panel Courtroom, led by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, along with Justice Anwar Usman and Justice Arsul Sani. Petitioner Masail Ishmad Mawaqif declared that Article 3 letter g of the Advocate Law contradicts Article 28C paragraph (1), Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28H paragraph (2), and Article 31 of the 1945 Constitution.

In a concrete case, Masail recounted that he had been an apprentice in the trial recording department of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) for three consecutive years. He assumed that an internship begins when a person has completed studies at the Faculty of Law or after conducting Special Education for the Advocate Profession (PKPA), or after taking the Advocate Professional Examination (UPA). From these requirements, Masail has carried out PKPA as required by Article 3 paragraph (1) of the Advocate Law. However, the norm is not explicitly explained in the derivative rules on the exact implementation time of the internship. It creates confusion for every law student in starting the internship.

To further confuse the Petitioner, so far the rules for the implementation of internships have been left to the advocate organization ('AO'), as stipulated in the Indonesian Advocates Association Regulation No. 1 of 2015 on the Implementation of Advocate Internships. However, there are still many AOs that have not clearly regulated the rules of this internship; even the number of AOs and advocate offices makes it difficult for the Petitioner to apply for an internship at one of the advocate offices with different backgrounds from the advocate organization.

“For this reason, the Petitioner requests that the Court declare that Article 3 paragraph (1) letter g of the Advocates Law is not contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia insofar as it is interpreted as ‘the implementation of internships can be carried out at institutions that carry out pro justitia functions,’” Masail said when reading out one of the petitums.

Petition’s Structure

Justice Arsul Sani advised that the Petitioner needs to observe the Constitutional Court Regulation Number 2 of 2023 on the Procedural Law for Judicial Review Cases (PMK Number 2 of 2021), especially Article 10 paragraph (2) related to the petition's structure. Moreover, the Petitioner may look at and review petition examples that have been submitted to the Court, including decisions, especially in the background part. “The Petitioner may read and study the well-written petition, the structure, and substance. Essentially, a petition in the Constitutional Court consisted of four parts, namely the Court’s authority, petitioner’s legal standing, reasoning or posita, and petitioner’s request or petitum,” Justice Arsul explained.

Further, Justice Anwar Usman also recommended that the Petitioner specify the requests as norms that are unconstitutional by comparing them with articles being reviewed in the Constitution. Meanwhile, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, in his advice, gave a note regarding the Petitioner’s legal standing on the basis of the right to file a petition to the Constitutional Court.

"Explain why the enactment of this norm harms you. Where is the impaired right mentioned in the 1945 Constitution? Look for articles related to equal treatment before the law so that by being in an area in the 3T (outermost, remote, and underdeveloped), it must be given the opportunity as the rights stipulated in the 1945 Constitution. Look at the formulation of legal standing in the petition that has been submitted to the Constitutional Court,” the Deputy Chief Justice explained.

At the end of the hearing, the Deputy Chief Justice said that the petitioner was given 14 days to improve his petition. The revised petition may be submitted no later than Tuesday, November 5, 2024 to the Registrar's Office.

Author: Sri Pujianti.

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.

---