The Petitioners and legal counsels at the preliminary hearing for the judicial review of the Law on the Legislative Branch for case No. 164/PUU-XXII/2024, Monday (12/16/2024). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Petitioners of case No. 164/PUU-XXII/2024 have revised their material judicial review petition of Article 76 paragraph (4), Article 252 paragraph (5), Article 318 paragraph (4), and Article 367 paragraph (4) of Law No. 17 of 2014 on the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR), House of Representatives (DPR), Regional Representatives Council (DPD), and Regional Legislative Council (DPRD), also known as the MD3 Law. They Petitioners believe the articles do not regulate restriction on the terms of office of members of the legislative members and their reelection.

Bandung City DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) member candidate for 2024 Indri Hafsari alleged that some of the legislative members involved in graft cases have taken office before. Therefore, she wishes that restriction over the terms of office of members of the legislative members be regulated in the MD3 Law.

“For example, in Bandung City [recently], a corruption case on the procurement of telecommunications equipment with the mayor, many reelected legislative members were arrested,” she said at the petition revision hearing on Monday, December 16, 2024.

The other petitioner is political party member Amul Hikmah. He said the articles petitioned does not provide legal certainty nor does it present all citizens with the same opportunity, thus are unconstitutional.

Through legal counsel mas Muhammad Imammullah El Hakim, the Petitioners argued that legislative members should only take office for two terms. This, they asserted, is important for the sake of equality between branches of power and for preventing absolute power.

“Indonesia lead other countries by example in setting restriction on legislative members’ terms of office as well as for other public positions,” El Hakim said.

The Petitioners revised their petitums. They ask that the Court declare Article 76 paragraph (4), Article 252 paragraph (5), Article 318 paragraph (4), and Article 367 paragraph (4) of Law No. 17 of 2014 unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted following their requests. One of them is so that Article 76 paragraph (4) be interpreted as “and can be reelected into the same office for one more term.”

Also read: Lack of Restriction on Legislative Members’ Terms in MD3 Law Questioned

The session was presided over by Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (panel chair), Enny Nurbaningsih, and Ridwan Mansyur. Before concluding the hearing, Justice Arief announced that the hearing would be reported to the justice deliberation meeting (RPH) to determine whether it would be ruled right away or continue to evidentiary hearings.

Author         : Mimi Kartika
Editor          : Lulu Anjarsari P.
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.

---