Petitioner A. Fahrur Rozi conveying the revisions to his petition against Law No. 13 of 2022 on Lawmaking, Wednesday (10/30/2024). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Constitutional law student of UIN (State Islamic University) Syarif Hidayatullah of Jakarta A. Fahrur Rozi has revised his material judicial review petition No. 144/PUU-XXII/2024 on Article 96 paragraph (3) of Law No. 13 of 2022 on Lawmaking. He added an elaboration of the loss of his constitutional right to participate in lawmaking due to the enforcement of the article.

“Why do I feel disadvantaged by the enforcement of the a quo article? Because my right to participate in the formation of legislation whose content does not concern my interest and/or does not directly impact me is restricted,” he argued at the petition revision hearing on Wednesday, October 30, 2024.

Article 96 paragraph (3) of Law No. 13 of 2022 reads, “The public as referred to in paragraph (1) shall be an individual or group of people who are directly affected and/or have an interest in the content material of the Bill of Legislation.” The provision on public participation is also regulated in the elucidation to the article, which reads, “The ‘group of people’ shall be a community group/organization, professional organization, and non-governmental organization registered with the authorized ministry, customary law communities, and persons with disabilities.”

Thus, in addition to being directly affected or having an interest in the content of the material under discussion, the community group concerned must also be registered with the authorized ministry. The Petitioner argued the phrase “registered with the authorized ministry” also violates the provision number 176 of Appendix II of Law No. 12 2011 on Lawmaking because it does not serve as a means to clarify the norms contained in the body, so the provisions related to the subject of public participation become unclear.

The Petitioner claimed to have conducted a study of the academic paper and an observation of the minutes of the work meeting on the discussion of the bill of the second amendment to Law No. 12 of 2011. He stated that he had not found any discussion or explanation of the reasons and urgency of the phrase “registered with the authorized ministry” in the elucidation to the article. In fact, he said, a number of discussions emphasized the importance of meaningful public participation for both individuals and groups as inclusively as possible, such as groups of people with disabilities.

As a logical consequence of the provisions of the a quo article, the guarantee of the right to participation in lawmaking process is limited or not comprehensive. Individual citizens or community groups who want to advance themselves to fight for their rights or express their thoughts on a legislative formation process must be directly affected or have an interest in the content material therein.

Also read: Labor Party, Hanura Agree Presidential Threshold Be Changed, Golkar Disagrees

In the revised petitums, the Petitioner requests that the Court declare the following phrases unconstitutional and not legally binding: “who are directly affected and/or have an interest” in Article 96 paragraph (3) of Law No. 13 of 2022 if not interpreted as “including those who have concern”; “registered with the authorized ministry.”

Author            : Mimi Kartika
Editor            : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR                 : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
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.

---