The Petitioners of Law No. 19 of 2003 on State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs) submitting revised arguments at a petition revision hearing in the panel courtroom of the Constitutional Court, Tuesday (9/16/2025). Photo by MKRI/Panji

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) convened a judicial review hearing on the phenomenon of concurrent positions among commissioners of state-owned enterprises (SOEs) on Tuesday, September 16, 2025. At the second hearing of Case No. 156/PUU-XXIII/2025, the Petitioners, represented by Christianto, presented the principal points of their petition revision. These included the Petitioners’ identities, the Court’s jurisdiction, legal standing and constitutional impairment, grounds of the petition, and the petitums.

Previously, the petition was filed by eight individuals. However, in this hearing, the number of Petitioners was reduced to six.

“The Petitioners request the Court to declare Article 27B of Law No. 1 of 2025 on the Third Amendment to Law No. 19 of 2003 on State-Owned Enterprises unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as it is not interpreted to mean that commissioners are prohibited from concurrently holding office as: a) members of the board of directors/board of supervisors of other SOEs, their subsidiaries, and regional state-owned enterprises; b) structural, functional, or politically appointed positions by the President in ministries, central government agencies, or regional governments; c) political party executives, legislative candidates, members of legislatures, regional head candidates, deputy regional head candidates, regional heads, and/or deputy regional heads; d) other positions that may directly give rise to conflicts of interest; and/or e) other positions pursuant to statutory laws and regulations,” Christianto explained.

Also read: Concurrent Positions of SOE Commissioners Prone to Conflicts of Interest

For reference, Case No. 156/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by Christianto (Petitioner I), Beckham Jufian Podung (Petitioner II), Christfael Noverio Sulung (Petitioner III), Muhammad Gufron Rum (Petitioner IV), Siska (Petitioner V), and Dwi Perdita Sari (Petitioner VI). They challenged Article 27B of the SOE Law, which they argued is discriminatory and contains disparity in regulating concurrent positions of SOE commissioners.

Article 27B stipulates: “The board of commissioners shall not concurrently serve as: a. members of the board of directors, board of commissioners, or board of supervisors of other SOEs, their subsidiaries, and regional state-owned enterprises; and/or b. other positions pursuant to statutory laws and regulations.”

At the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, September 3, 2025, Beckham Jufian, on behalf of the Petitioners, contended that the provision had enabled situations where, for instance, a deputy minister also serves as an SOE commissioner. This practice, he said, creates conflicts of interest, undermines state finances, compromises governmental integrity, and violates the sense of justice within society.

According to the Petitioners, the concurrent holding of commissioner positions has generated public concern over potential abuse of power, bureaucratic inefficiency, and lack of focus in performing governmental duties. They argued that such disparity under Article 27B of the SOE Law contravenes Article 28D paragraph (1) and Article 28I paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

Moreover, the Petitioners pointed out that Constitutional Court Decision No. 80/PUU-XVII/2019 and Decision No. 21/PUU-XXIII/2025 had expressly prohibited deputy ministers from concurrently serving as SOE commissioners. However, they claimed these rulings have been disregarded by the government, creating a legal vacuum that allows unchecked executive discretion. In fact, under Articles 24 and 17 of Law No. 30 of 2014 on Government Administration, state officials’ discretion must comply with the General Principles of Good Governance (AUPB), which include professionalism, proportionality, and the prohibition against abuse of power.

Accordingly, the Petitioners petitioned the Court to strike down Article 27B of the SOE Law insofar as it is not interpreted to prohibit commissioners from holding concurrent positions as: a. members of the board of directors, board of commissioners, or board of supervisors of other SOEs, their subsidiaries, and regional SOEs; b. structural, functional, or politically appointed positions by the President in ministries, central government agencies, or regional governments; c. political party executives, legislative candidates, members of legislatures, regional head candidates, deputy regional head candidates, regional heads, and/or deputy regional heads; d. other positions that may directly cause conflicts of interest, and/or other positions pursuant to statutory laws and regulations.

Author: Sri Pujianti
Editor: N. Rosi
PR: Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
Translator: Yuanna Sisilia

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.

More read: Petition Case No. 156/PUU-XXIII/2025 (in Bahasa Indonesia)

 

---