House Commission VI Chairperson Anggia Ermarini giving her statement at a judicial review hearing of Law No. 1 of 2025 on State-Owned Enterprises, Monday (10/13/2025. Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another judicial review hearing of Law No. 1 of 2025 on State-Owned Enterprises (SOEs Law) against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, on Monday, October 13, 2025. The agenda was to hear statements from the House of Representatives (DPR) and the President for Cases No. 38, 43, 44, and 80/PUU-XXIII/2025.

Representing the President/Government, Deputy Minister of Law and Human Rights Edhi Omar Sharif Hiariej said that a Fourth Amendment Bill to the SOEs Law had been passed, and all the articles challenged by the Petitioners had been amended.

“The substantive changes in the SOEs Bill were essentially aimed at strengthening governance and the effectiveness of SOEs’ roles. The Government conveys that all the articles requested for judicial review by the Petitioners have been amended in the Fourth Amendment to Law No. 19 of 2003,” said Edhi in the plenary courtroom of the Court in Jakarta.

He explained that the Bill had been approved by the House at its plenary session on October 2, 2025. In the President’s final statement, delivered by the Minister of State Apparatus Utilization and Bureaucratic Reform, the Government outlined key aspects contained in the Bill.

The amendments include, among others, the institutional transformation of the Ministry of State-Owned Enterprises into the State-Owned Enterprises Regulatory Agency (BP BUMN); a two-year limit on the concurrent positions of ministers and deputy ministers as SOE organs, starting from the issuance of the Constitutional Court’s ruling on dual office-holding.

The Bill also regulates gender equality in appointing SOE employees to serve as directors, board of commissioners, or other managerial positions; taxation arrangements on transactions involving Badan Danantara, investment and operational holdings, and their subsidiaries, as well as third parties transacting with them; and audit authority for the Audit Board of Indonesia (BPK) in accordance with statutory regulations. In addition, employees of the former Ministry of SOEs will be transferred to BP BUMN, and the authority of Badan Danantara as a guarantor for investment holdings will be strengthened with the Supervisory Board’s approval.

Meanwhile, Chief Justice Suhartoyo admitted that the Court had only learned of the new SOEs Law number that morning. He returned the decision on whether to proceed with the petitions to each Petitioner, given the legislative changes.

“If the provisions being reviewed have already been amended, you surely understand the legal implications if the case proceeds,” he remarked.

However, Suhartoyo also stated that the Court would first examine the new SOEs Law. He requested the Government and the House to submit information and evidence confirming the changes, particularly the articles being reviewed. Thus, he added, the Court could not yet schedule the next hearing.

“We only received the information about the law number and confirmation this morning that all the norms under review have been amended,” Suhartoyo said.

 

Background of the Petitions

Case No. 38/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by lecturer Rega Felix, challenging Articles 3H(2), 3X(1), 4B, 9G, and 87(5) of the SOEs Law. He argued that the provisions separating the losses of Badan Pengelola Investasi Daya Anagata Nusantara (BPI Danantara) from those of SOEs as state losses were contrary to the constitutional mandate to eradicate corruption.

“How could an entity that directly receives delegated authority from the President have its officials not regarded as state officials? Therefore, Articles 3X(1), 9G, and 87(5) of the SOEs Law must be declared unconstitutional, as they contradict the spirit of eradicating corruption and deviate from constitutional principles,” said Rega Felix during the preliminary hearing on April 28, 2025.

Case No. 43/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by A. Fahrur Rozi, Dzakwan Fadhil Putra Kusuma, and Muhammad Jundi Fathi Rizky, who challenged Articles 3H(2), 3X(1), 4B, 9G, and 87(5) of the same law. They contended that excluding BPI Danantara’s profits and losses from state finances and exempting its employees from the status of state officials could encourage corruption within SOEs.

“In the end, this could only nurture corrupt practices within SOEs,” said Muhammad Jundi Fathi Rizky at the preliminary hearing on May 5, 2025.

Case No. 44/PUU-XXIII/2025 was lodged by Heri Hasan Basri and Solihin, two entrepreneurs, contesting Articles 3X(1) and 3Y(a–b). They claimed their constitutional right to report SOE or Danantara officials allegedly committing corruption to law enforcement was hindered by the disputed provisions.

Lastly, Case No. 80/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by the Indonesia Human Rights Committee for Social Justice (IHCS) and three citizens. They challenged Articles 3F(2)(a–b), 3G(2)(b–c), 3H(2), 3X(1), and 71(2–4) of the SOEs Law, arguing that even when SOE funds were recognized as state assets, misuse still occurred—leading to state losses and criminal convictions. Therefore, excluding SOE and Danantara funds from the state budget and removing Danantara’s officials from the category of state officials could worsen corruption.

 

Also read:

Questioning the Separation of Danantara and BUMN Losses as State Losses

Rega Felix and His Wife Revise Petition of BUMN Judicial Review Regarding Danantara

Hearing on Judicial Review of State-Owned Enterprises Law Postponed as DPR and President Unprepared to Testify

Tightening Danantara’s Governance to Prevent Corruption

Petitioners Question State Loss Definition in BUMN Law

IHCS Revises Petition on the Danantara Superiority in SOE

IHCS Protests Danantara Superiority

 

Explore the Cases

Case No. 38/PUU-XXIII/2025

Case No. 43/PUU-XXIII/2025

Case No. 44/PUU-XXIII/2025

Case No. 80/PUU-XXIII/2025

 

Author: Mimi Kartika
Editor: N. Rosi
PR: Andhini S. F.

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.

 

 

---