The Petitioner presenting the merits of his judicial review petition of the Manpower Law, Wednesday (5/21/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held the preliminary hearing for case No. 70/PUU-XXIII/2025 on the judicial review of Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower on Wednesday, May 21, 2025.

Leonardo Olefins Hamonangan challenges Article 35 paragraph (1) of the Manpower Law, which reads, “Employers who need workforce may recruit by themselves the workforce they need or have them recruited through job placement agencies.”

At the hearing, the Petitioner said he has actively been seeking employment through various digital platforms and found many discriminatory recruitment practices. Some companies, he said, set selection requirements based on age, alma mater, and physical appearance.

“Article 35 paragraph (1) of Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower has issues relating to sense of justice,” he said before the Court.

He argued that the norm allows for discriminatory practices in the job recruitment process, which is contrary to the principles of social justice and non-discrimination as mandated in the Constitution. He emphasized that the State should be present to ensure a fair and equal recruitment process for all citizens. To reinforce his argument, he cited a number of court decisions from other countries relating to discrimination in recruitment, including based on gender, age, religious beliefs, and race.

Through his petition, Hamonangan asked the Court to declare Article 35 paragraph (1) of the Manpower Law conditionally unconstitutional. He proposed that it be interpreted to mean that employers may not set employment requirements that are discriminatory against age, gender, race, religion, educational background, alma mater, or other personal conditions that are not relevant to the competence and objective of the position.

In response, Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih advised the Petitioner to elaborate his constitutional impairment. “In the part on legal standing, [detail] the rights granted by the Constitution and whether they are harmed by the enforcement of Article 35 paragraph (1). Emphasize whether or not there is loss due to the enforcement of the norm, and whether it is actual or potential,” she said.

At the end of the session, the panel gave the Petitioner 14 days to revise the petition. The revised petition should be received by the Court by Tuesday, June 3, 2025.

Also read petition No. 70/PUU-XXIII/2025.

Author         : Utami Argawati
Editor          : N. Rosi
PR               : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
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.

---