The Petitioners’ legal counsels at the petition revision hearing of Law No. 11 of 2021 on the Prosecution Office, Tuesday (3/18/2025). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held the second 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 Tuesday, March 18, 2025.

Before Chief Justice Suhartoyo and Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah, the Petitioners’ legal counsel Ibnu Syamsu Hidayat stated that the petition had been revised following the justices’ advice. “We have made additions following the justices’ advice. First, we have [elaborated] the Court’s authority in order from the Constitution, the Judiciary Law, the Constitutional Court Law, the Lawmaking Law, and Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2021,” he explained.

The Petitioners have also added the elaboration of their legal standing. Ibnu said that the Petitioners have constitutional rights granted by the 1945 Constitution, i.e. the right to equality before the law and in government, to guaranteed fair legal protection, and equal treatment before the law.

“In essence, the Petitioners could potentially lose the opportunity to perform checks and balances on the Prosecution Office when they discover any violation by prosecutors.

Also read: Petitioners Question Prosecutors’ Unlimited Immunity

The petition for case No. 9/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by 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.”

At the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, March 5, 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.

Therefore, in the petitums, the Petitioners requested that the Court grant their petition. They also asked that the Court declare Article 8 paragraph (5) of the Prosecution Law unconstitutional.

Read the revised 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.

---