The Petitioners and their legal counsels presenting the revisions to the judicial review petition of the BUMN Law, Wednesday (5/21/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Two Petitioners of case No. 52/PUU-XXIII/2025 presented the revisions to the formal judicial review petition of Law No. 1 of 2025 on the Third Amendment to Law No. 19 of 2003 on State-Owned Enterprises (BUMN Law). They believe the BUMN Bill had not been included in the Prolegnas (national legislative program) priority list, thus creating procedural mistake that led to the new BUMN Law being formally flawed.

“As a result of these formal defects, the lawmaking process of the a quo Law has violated Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 22A as delegated to the Lawmaking Law, and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution,” said legal counsel Reyhan Fayyaz Rizal at the petition revision hearing on Wednesday, May 7, 2025.

In addition, the Petitioners’ right to fair legal certainty under Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution was also violated. They explained that the lack of a formal process to amend the annual Prolegnas priority list to include the BUMN Bill had resulted in the formation in 2025 containing procedural defects, so the BUMN Law can be declared formally defective.

In fact, it is possible for an annual Prolegnas priority list to be amended by adding a bill that has not been previously included. However, changes to the list must be discussed and decided through a House plenary meeting as per Article 121 paragraph (1) of DPR Regulation No. 1 of 2020. Meanwhile, no BUMN Bill was included in the amendment to the annual Prolegnas priority list at the 8th to 12th plenary meetings.

The Petitioners asserted that the bill’s legislative program should be based on the annual Prolegnas priority list set for that year. Thus, the BUMN Bill’s legislation program, which was registered outside the annual Prolegnas priority list, was a procedural irregularity.

Also read: Students Challenge BUMN Law Formally for Lack of Public Participation

The Petitioners are Abu Rizal Biladina and Bima Surya, fourth-semester law students of the University of Indonesia (UI). They believe the House of Representatives (DPR) had not complied with the statutory laws on lawmaking embodied in Article 22A of the 1945 Constitution, thus violating their constitutional rights protected under Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. As such, they emphasized, the BUMN Law is invalid as it did not follow applicable lawmaking procedure.

Therefore, in the petitums, they requested that the Court declare Law No. 1 of 2025 on BUMN not meeting lawmaking provisions mandated by the 1945 Constitution. They also requested that the Court declare it unconstitutional and, thus, not legally binding, and declare the norms in the Law that have been amended, removed, and/or declared unconstitutional back in effect.

The hearing was presided over by Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (panel chair), Anwar Usman, and Enny Nurbaningsih. Before adjourning the session, Justice Arief said the hearing would be reported to the other constitutional justices though a deliberation meeting so that the Court can make a stance on the petition.

Read the petition for case No. 52/PUU-XXIII/2025.

Author         : Mimi Kartika
Editor          : N. Rosi
PR               : Fauzan F.
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.

---