Decision pronouncement hearing of formal judicial review petition on Law No. 3 of 2025 on the Indonesian National Armed Forces, Thursday (05/06). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

Jakarta (MKRI) – The Constitutional Court decided on Case No. 79/PUU-XXIII/2025 on the judicial review of Law No. 3 of 2025 on the Amendment to Law No. 34 of 2004 on the Indonesian National Armed Forces. The Court declared the petition unacceptable, stating that the Petitioners had no legal standing to file the case.

The Court considered that the Petitioners could not explain the direct relationship between their qualification as students or voters in the process of enacting and making Law No. 3 of 2025. The Court held that the petitioners’ academic activities, including discussions and demonstrations, as mentioned in the legal standing section, were not directly related to the supervision of the making of Law No. 3 of 2025. Their evidence on this matter consisted of a discussion leaflet on the Army Law, Police Law, and Attorney General’s Office Law Bill, which were not legalized in the Court hearing on May 22, because they were submitted on May 28, 2025.

“The Court could not prove the real activities of Petitioner I, Petitioner II, Petitioner III, Petitioner IV, Petitioner V, and Petitioner VI, which prove that there are direct relations with the process of Law No. 3 of 2025 making so that there were no causalities or causa verband between the petitioners’ constitutional harms and the process of Law No. 3 of 2025 making,” Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra pronounced the Court’s legal consideration, on Thursday, June 5, 2025, at the Plenary Courtroom.

Read also:

Petition on Army Law Highlights Armed Forces Assignment to Ministries

Reviewing Indonesian National Army Law Legislation Process

Case No. 79/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by students Endrianto Bayu Setiawan, Raditya Nur Sya'bani, Felix Rafiansyah Affandi, Dinda Rahmalia, Muhamad Teguh Pebrian, and Andrean Agus Budiyanto. They petitioned Article 7 paragraph (4), Article 47 paragraph (1), and Article 47 paragraph (3) of the Army Law.

In the petitums, the Petitioners requested the Court to declare Article 7 paragraph (4) of the Army Law contrary to the 1945 and does not have legally binding force conditionally as long as it is not interpreted as “The implementation of military operation other than war as referred to in paragraph (2) letter b is further regulated by law”, declare Article 47 paragraph (1) of the Army Law contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and does not have legally binding force conditionally as long as it is not interpreted as it is not interpreted as “Soldiers may hold positions in ministries/institutions that oversee the presidential military secretariat, the Republic of Indonesia Attorney General's Office, and the Supreme Court"; and to declare Article 47 paragraph (3) of the TNI Law contradictory to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and not have conditional binding legal force as long as it is not interpreted as "Soldiers who hold certain positions as referred to in paragraph (1) are based on the provisions of the law and are subject to the administrative provisions applicable within the ministry and institution".

Author: Mimi Kartika.

Editor: N. Rosi

PR: Andhini Sayu Fauzia.

Translator: Rizky Kurnia Chaesario

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.

---