The pronouncement session of the decree on Case No. 171/PUU-XXIII/2025 concerning the judicial review of Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates, Thursday (10/16/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bay.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) granted the withdrawal of Case No. 171/PUU-XXIII/2025 concerning the judicial review of Law No. 18 of 2003 on Advocates (Advocates Law). Chief Justice Suhartoyo pronounced the decree during the pronouncement session held in the plenary courtroom on Thursday, October 16, 2025.

The case had been filed by Fendi Darmawan, who challenged the constitutionality of Article 3 paragraph (1) letter g of the Advocates Law. The provision stipulates that an advocate candidate must complete a consecutive two-year internship at an advocate’s office as a prerequisite for appointment.

During the pronouncement session of the decree, Chief Justice Suhartoyo conveyed that the Court had received a letter of withdrawal from the Petitioner and had confirmed it in a hearing. “Essentially, the Petitioner confirmed the intention to withdraw or retract the petition,” he stated.

Furthermore, Suhartoyo explained that through the Justice Deliberation Meetings (RPH) convened on October 2, 7, 9, and 13, 2025, the Court determined that the withdrawal was legally well-founded. Therefore, the Petitioner may not refile the same petition.

“Subsequently, the RPH instructed the Registrar of the Court to record the withdrawal of the petition in the electronic constitutional case registration book (e-BRPK) and return the petition files to the Petitioner,” Suhartoyo added.

Also read:
Petitioner Withdraws Judicial Review Petition on Advocates Law

Previously, in the main substance of the petition, Fendi Darmawan requested that the Court declare Article 3 paragraph (1) letter g of the Advocates Law inconsistent with the 1945 Constitution and not legally binding, insofar as it is not interpreted to allow the internship period undertaken by law students during their legal practice or employment under the supervision of an advocate to be recognized. He argued that such internships should be considered valid as long as they are carried out genuinely and continuously and fulfill the two-year duration requirement stipulated in the Advocates Law.

Author: Utami Argawati
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR: Raisa Ayuditha M.
Translator: Aski V. Rumere/Yuanna Sisilia

The Full Decision: Decision on Case No. 171/PUU-XXIII/2025 (In Bahasa Indonesia)

 

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.

 

---