The legal counsel Putu Surya Pemana Putra, via online, on the judicial review of the Currency Law, submitting the arguments for the revision of the petition, Monday (5/5/2025). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) again held a preliminary examination hearing for Case No. 23/PUU-XXIII/2025 on the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2011 on Currency (Currency Law). The hearing took place in the Constitutional Court Courtroom, Jakarta, on Monday, May 5, 2025.

The petition was filed by advocate Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak who challenged Article 5 paragraph (1) letter c and paragraph (2) letter c of the Currency Law. Both articles regulate the designation of nominal rupiah currency in numbers and letters.

In the hearing with the agenda of reviewing the revised petition, Putu Surya Permana Putra as the Petitioner’s legal counsel said that he had revised it according to the panel's advices. "For the authority of the Court, we added related laws and regulations and the latest amendments were in accordance with the advices of the panel," he said.

In the legal standing section, he continued, according to the advice of the panel of justices, the Petitioner added more specific losses such as the Petitioner experiencing a transaction error due to excessive numbers. Then there was difficulty finding a money changer because the rupiah currency with a relatively large nominal value was not in line with the currencies of other countries. Then, the decline in self-esteem and the value of the currency, the Petitioner felt belittled as an Indonesian Citizen. In addition, the Petitioner also added to the petitum section.

Previously, Putu Surya Permana Putra as the legal counsel for Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak (Petitioner) explained that his client felt constitutionally disadvantaged by the provision. Surya assessed that the excessive use of zeros in rupiah denominations caused complications in daily transactions and risked causing errors in calculations.

"As an Indonesian citizen, of course, using the Rupiah currency as a legal currency recognized in this country. The Petitioner must also carry out various transactions by paying close attention to the number of zeros in the Rupiah so as not to cause miscalculations," Surya explained.

Also read:

Zeroes in Rupiah Said to Aggravate Nearsightedness

Aggravated Nearsightedness

For information, the petition for Case No. 23/PUU-XXIII/2025 on the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2011 on Currency (Currency Law) was filed by advocate Zico Leonard Djagardo Simanjuntak. The Petitioner is challenging Article 5 paragraph (1) letter c and paragraph (2) letter c of the Currency Law. Both articles regulate the designation of nominal denominations of rupiah currency in numbers and letters.

In the first hearing held at the Court on Tuesday April, 22. 2025, the Petitioner through his legal counsel, Putu Surya Permana Putra, said that the many zeros in the Rupiah currency were inefficient considering that many countries abroad were cutting zeros in their currencies and at the same time indicating how stable the economy in the country was. Another problem that the Petitioner experienced was because the habit of calculating large denominations had an impact on increasing myopia caused by visual fatigue and eye muscle tension (digital eye strain) as a result of the many zeros in the Petitioner's vision.

The Petitioner found out about this when he visited Singapore with the Singapore Dollar currency which does not have as many zeros as the Rupiah currency. It is very easy for the Petitoner to calculate and transact with the Singapore Dollar currency. In contrast, the Rupiah currency with a large denomination often makes it difficult for the Petitioner to transact because he has to be careful to see the number of zeros behind. Even because of the large denomination, the Petitioner has experienced a wrong transaction because of the many zeros.

“The large number of zeros often result in inefficient calculation in daily transactions. Because the object of this review is a fairly central article regulating the rupiah as a legitimate currency in Indonesia, it does not rule out the possibility that the Petitioner would ask the Court to consider other articles in the Currency Law or to discuss the redenomination bill through the Constitutional Court’s decision through this case,” Surya explained.

In the petitums, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare Article 5 paragraph (1) letter c of the Currency Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as: “The general characteristics of Rupiah banknotes as referred to in Article 2 paragraph (2) shall at least consist of: c. The designation of denomination both in number and letter as the nominal value that has been adjusted by converting the number Rp1000 (one thousand rupiah) to Rp1 (one rupiah).” He also asked the Court to declare Article 5 paragraph (2) letter c of the Currency Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as: “The general characteristics of the metal Rupiah as referred to in Article 2 paragraph (2) shall at least contain: c. The designation of denomination in number and letter as the nominal value that has been adjusted by converting the number Rp1000 (one thousand rupiah) into Rp1 (one rupiah).”

Read the revised petition for case No. 23/PUU-XXIII/2025 here.

Author        : Utami Argawati
Editor         : N. Rosi
PR             : Tiara Agustina
Translator  : Donny Yuniarto

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.

---