Secretary-General Heru Setiawan opening the focus group discussion on monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of Constitutional Court decisions, Wednesday (10/15/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — As part of ongoing efforts to improve the quality of its decisions, the Constitutional Court (MK) convened a focus group discussion (FGD) on the monitoring and evaluation of the implementation of its decisions on Wednesday, October 15, 2025, at its first and third buildings. The event was attended by representatives from various ministries/institutions, academics and researchers, as well as students from reputable universities including Esa Unggul University, Pamulang University, and Trisakti University.

In his opening remarks, Secretary-General Heru Setiawan emphasized that the Court continues to improve various aspects of the institution, from the organization of court proceedings to the provision of support systems for all parties involved in constitutional review. Among these efforts is the organization of this monitoring and evaluation event. He stated that while it may not fall within the Court’s core duties, the Court carries out this initiative to monitor decisions that may prove difficult to implement.

“From here, we will report the findings to the justices as notes for consideration in future similar cases. That is the strength of this monitoring and evaluation effort. We pay serious attention to the implementation of the Court’s decisions because their execution serves as a means to restore the constitutional rights of citizens that may have been violated. Through this activity, we can obtain a clearer picture of how Court’s decisions are implemented and the essence of their execution. If they have not been implemented, we seek to understand whether there are dynamics or challenges within the implementation framework. This is of great importance to the Court, and we hope this activity becomes more than just a routine forum,” Heru stated during the event, which was also attended by both the Court’s structural and functional officials.

Implementation within Execution

During the event, head of Legal Affairs and Cooperation Bureau (HAK) Fajar Laksono explained his report that the FGD was driven by the Court’s desire to listen directly to stakeholders regarding the practical implementation of its decisions. “What happens to the Court’s decision after it is pronounced? What does it look like in the field? A decision may indeed be implemented, but there can also be various dynamics involved. That is why we invited a broad range of participants, including academics from Esa Unggul University, Pamulang University, and Trisakti University. We specifically encouraged our academic colleagues to be active participants in this discussion forum on the monitoring and evaluation on Court’s decisions,” Fajar said.

In this activity, participants were divided into five thematic clusters, each assigned to a different discussion room focusing on a particular Constitutional Court ruling. Among the decisions discussed were: Cluster 1 with Decision No. 133/PUU-VII/2009 on Law No. 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK); Cluster 2 with Decision No. 102/PUU-XVIII/2020 on Law No. 10 of 1998 on Banking; Cluster 3 with Decision No. 87/PUU-XXI/2023, also related to Law No. 30 of 2002 on the KPK; Cluster 4 with Decision No. 32/PUU-XVIII/2020 on the 2014 Insurance Law; Cluster 5 with Decision No. 70/PUU-XX/2022 on Law No. 11 of 2021, which amended Law No. 16 of 2004 on the Prosecution Office of the Republic of Indonesia.

Effective Forum for Dialogue

At the closing of the event, Anton Purba, a representative of the Financial Services Authority (OJK), participated in Cluster 2, shared his reflections after attending the discussion session. He noted that following the presentations delivered by the speakers in each cluster, participants engaged in lively and substantive discussions. In observing this, Anton remarked that the event served as an effective platform for dialogue and communication among various parties—not only those who had previously been involved in judicial review cases, but also academics and students who contributed valuable perspectives and insights on the decisions under review.

“This activity has been extremely beneficial, as it allowed us to evaluate whether the policies adopted by the OJK are in line with the Court’s decisions. During the hearings, we may have stood on opposing sides, but in this forum we are able to reach shared conclusions for the collective good in relation to the Court’s decision. It also helps us consider how we can support the Court in understanding the extent to which its decisions influence national regulations,” Anton concluded.

Collaboration is Key

In his closing remarks, Fajar emphasized that this activity represents a small yet meaningful step for the Court—one that ultimately yields internal results. He explained that when the Court is able to observe and listen to how its decisions are implemented or evolve within society, these findings can serve as valuable input for constitutional justices.

“The outcomes of this activity will be thoroughly compiled so that, upon review, they can contribute to producing clearer and more impactful decisions. These results are intended not just for reflection, but for practical application in the future. Moreover, the follow-up governance stemming from this activity will require strong collaboration. Since Court decisions are final and binding, their implementation must be collectively monitored and supported at the bureaucratic level. Through these rounds of discussion, we hope to gain a clearer understanding of the real-world dynamics surrounding Court decisions,” Fajar affirmed.

Author         : Sri Pujianti
Editor          : Lulu Anjarsari P.
Translator     : Jessica Rivena Meilania/YW (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.

---