The preliminary hearing for the judicial review of the State Treasury Law, Tuesday (3/4/2025). Photo by MKRI/Ilham W.M.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Several retired civil servants of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs (MoFA), who used to be stationed overseas, have challenged the provisions on the payment of domestic basic salaries in Article 40 paragraphs (1) and (2) of Law No. 1 of 2004 on the State Treasury. The Petitioners are Kusdiana, Hari Budiarto, Khaerul Anwar Bratawijaya, Hari Tjahyono, and Sarwono (Petitioners I-IV).

Article 40 paragraph (1) reads, “The right to collect the state/regional debt burden shall be expired after five (5) years from the mature of the debt, except stipulated otherwise by the law.” Meanwhile, Article 40 paragraph (2) reads, “The expiration as referred to in paragraph (1) shall be delayed if the creditor submits the bills to the state/region before the end of the expiration period.”

The Petitioners believe that those provisions are in violation of Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 28D paragraphs (1) and 2), as well as Article 28I paragraphs (4) and (5).

The preliminary hearing for case No. 184/PUU-XXII/2024 took place on Wednesday, March 5, 2025. At the hearing, the Petitioners were accompanied by legal counsels Viktor Santoso Tandiasa, Agustine Pentrantoni Penau, and Azyumardi Arza.

Penau stated that the suspension of domestic basic salaries to civil servants in government agencies, in this case MoFA, began with the issuance of Circular Letter (SE) No. 015690 on October 16, 1950. This regulation became the basis for the non-payment of domestic basic salaries for MoFA employees. The suspension was based on the limited supply of foreign exchange, and the policy was enforced while waiting for a definitive decision.

This means, Penau added, that the circular letter applied temporary until the issuance of the Government Regulation No. 200 of 1961 and its amendments as well as Law No. 18 of 1961 and its amendments, which stipulates civil servants’ basic salary and allowances, including the separation between the right to basic salary and the right to allowances. However, in reality, after the issuance of those two pieces of legislation, the suspension of domestic basic salaries to civil servants in all civil servants of MoFA continued while the individuals were being stationed overseas. It was only later on July 2, 2014 that Letter No. R-05604/KEMLU/140702 was issued to explain the payment of domestic basic salaries for home staff serving in Indonesian representatives abroad.

However, the Petitioners, who were stationed overseas prior to Januari 1, 2013, did not receive domestic basic salaries, while those stationed after did. Even, Petitioner II (Hari Budiarto), who was stationed in Hong Kong on October 10, 2013, has not received his domestic basic salaries from January 1 to October 10, 2013 because he left for Hong Kong on February 23, 2009.

“Employee salaries are monthly employee expenditures, so they are not included in the category of state expenses (not state debt) that must be collected in advance and cannot expire,” explained Tandiasa from the plenary courtroom. 

Legal Arguments

At the hearing, Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh gave some advice for the petition’s improvement. One of it is that the Petitioners were to describe the condition in 1961 when the Petitioners had been stationed overseas, to affirm their arguments.

“Also explain the basic salaries and/or allowances by country, to provide the constitutional justices with a comprehensive understanding,” he said.

Next, Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah advised the Petitioners to take into account whether domestic basic salaries had been considered in the overseas allowances when the circular letter was issued. “The constitutional justices need to have the [circular’s] complete documents,” he said.

Meanwhile, Chief Justice Suhartoyo said that the article has been reinterpreted by the Court in Decisions No. 15/PUU-XIV/2016 and No. 18/PUU-XV/2017. He urged the Petitioners to study those decisions.

“In these decisions, only in terms of the state’s political will—whether or not domestic basic salaries were included in the overseas allowances—the concern was if the state would pay double. Actually, there is no expiry for wage/salary,” he explained.

Before concluding the hearing, Chief Justice Suhartoyo announced that the Petitioners would have 14 days to revise their petition. The revised petition should be submitted no later than Monday, March 17, 2025 to the Registrar’s Office, after which the Court will schedule a second hearing to review the revised petition.

Read the petition No. 184/PUU-XXII/2024 here.

Author          : Sri Pujianti
Editor           : N. Rosi
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.

---