The Petitioners’ legal counsel Ibnu Syamsu Hidayat conveying the petition’s subject matters at the preliminary hearing of the Prosecution Law, Wednesday (3/5/2025). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held the preliminary hearing for case No. 9/PUU-XXIII/2025 on the material judicial review of Law No. 11 of 2021 on the Amendment to Law No. 16 of 2004 on the Prosecution Office on Wednesday, March 5, 2025.

The Petitioners are advocates Agus Salim and Agung Arafat Saputra. They challenge Article 8 paragraph (5) of the Prosecution Law, which reads, “In exercising their duties and authority, summon, inspection, search, arrest, and detention against a prosecutor may only be executed with Attorney General’s approval.”

The hearing was presided over by Chief Justice Suhartoyo alongside Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah. At the hearing, the Petitioners’ legal counsel Ibnu Syamsu Hidayat argued that the article has given prosecutors absolute immunity, thus could potentially hinder supervision and increase the risk of abuse of authority.

“The article has led to absolute immunity of prosecutors, so that control or supervision over the performance of prosecutors has become difficult. It could potentially lead to abuse of authority, ‘superpower’ practices, and even corruption acts. Therefore, there must be a clear limit on the right to immunity of law enforcement apparatuses,” Ibnu said.

The Petitioners compared the right to immunity of prosecutors and that of advocates, which is regulated under Article 16 of Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates. The article stipulates that advocates cannot be prosecuted either civilly or criminally in carrying out their professional duties in good faith for the defense of clients in court.

The Petitioners believes that there should also be a similar limit on the right to immunity of prosecutors in order to preserve the principle of equality before the law. “This phrase is highly catch-all and has no legal certainty. It makes it easy for something that prosecutors should not do to be claimed as something within the execution of their duties and authority,” Ibnu stressed.

In the petition, the Petitioners proposed several arguments on the general overview of the right to immunity, its implementation in Indonesia, and the risk of right to unlimited immunity, which could result in impunity. Based on the arguments, they requested that the Court grant their petition. They also asked that the Court declare Article 8 paragraph (5) of the Prosecution Law unconstitutional.

Justices’ Advice

In response, Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh asked the Petitioners to revise the petition and make it more systematic and comprehensive, especially in elaborating their legal standing and the causal relations to the constitutional impairment as advocates.

“The requirements in determining the loss of constitutional rights and/or authority must be elaborated comprehensively. As of now, the Petitioners have only explained their position as citizens who are advocates, but have not explained their losses further,” Justice Foekh said.

At the end of the hearing, the panel gave the petitioners 14 days to revise their petition, which should be submitted no later than Tuesday, March 18, 2025.

Read the petition No. 9/PUU-XXIII/2025 here.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : N. Rosi
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.

---