Petitioner Astro Alfa Liecharlie, on the judicial review of IKN Law, DKJ Law, Penajem Paser Law, and Kutai Kartanegara Law, delivering the subject matter of his petition in front of the Justices during the preliminary hearing, Tuesday (21/10). Photo by MKRI/IlhamWM.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) – The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing for the judicial review of several laws related to Indonesia’s new capital: Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital, Law No. 21 of 2023 amending Law No. 3 of 2022, Law No. 7 of 2002 on the Establishment of Penajam Paser Utara Regency, Law No. 47 of 1999 on the Establishment of Kutai Kartanegara Regency, Law No. 2 of 2024 on the Special Province of Jakarta, and Law No. 151 of 2024 amending Law No. 2 of 2024 on the Special Province of Jakarta (DKJ Law). The session for Case No. 187/PUU‑XXIII/2025 was held on Tuesday, October 21, 2025, with petitioner Astro Alfa Liecharlie present in person.

The provisions challenged by the petitioner include Article 8 paragraph (2) and the Elucidation of Law No. 47 of 1999 on the Establishment of Nunukan Regency, Malinau Regency, West Kutai Regency, East Kutai Regency, and Bontang City (Law 47/1999); Article 5 paragraph (1) letters a and b of Law No. 7 of 2002 on the Establishment of Penajam Paser Utara Regency in the Province of East Kalimantan (Law 7/2002); Articles 4 paragraph (2), 27, 39, 40 paragraph (1) letter b, 41 paragraph (3), and the Elucidation of Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital (Law 3/2022); Articles 6 paragraphs (2) and (3) letter b, the Elucidation, and the Annex of Law No. 21 of 2023 amending Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital (Law 21/2023); Articles 63, 65, and 73 of Law No. 2 of 2024 on the Special Province of Jakarta (Law 2/2024); and Article II of Law No. 151 of 2024 amending Law No. 2 of 2024 on the Special Province of Jakarta (Law 151/2024).

The petitioner argued that these provisions require a presidential decree to formally initiate the transfer of the national capital from the Special Capital Region of Jakarta to Nusantara and to commence the administration of the IKN Special Regional Government, as well as the implementation of the DKJ Law. According to the petitioner, this requirement delays the special status of the provincial level intended for both Jakarta and Nusantara and hinders the execution of the IKN and DKJ Laws—measures deemed beneficial not only for Indonesia generally but also for their respective special agglomeration area.

Astro contended that to enable the gradual relocation of national institutions, Nusantara should have automatically assumed the status, functions, and role of the national capital upon enactment of the IKN Law, without the need for a presidential decree. The same applies to the Nusantara Special Regional Government, which should begin operating immediately, given that the IKN Authority (OIKN) is already empowered by Article 5 paragraph (6) of the IKN Law to issue regulations for governing the new capital.

He further noted that Article 66 of the DKJ Law already provides that government agencies or organizations unable to relocate may remain temporarily in Jakarta. Therefore, he argued, the transition to Nusantara as the capital could proceed at once without awaiting a presidential decree. Jakarta, he said, could temporarily retain its capital functions alongside Nusantara until the transition period formally concludes—at which point a decree would be needed only to terminate Jakarta’s capital status.

The petitioner also questioned unresolved boundary issues in the legal provisions concerning the Nusantara Special Region, claiming that overlaps remain between the territorial jurisdictions of East Kalimantan Province, Penajam Paser Utara Regency, and Kutai Kartanegara Regency.

Astro Li, who appeared in person in the Plenary Courtroom, read one of his twenty‑seven requests, stating, “To declare that Article 4 paragraph (2) of Law 3 of 2022 (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2022 Number 41, Supplement to State Gazette Number 6766) contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and has no binding legal force insofar as it is not interpreted to mean, ‘The termination of the status, functions, and role of the National Capital in the Special Province of Jakarta shall be decided by Presidential Decree.’”

Petitioner's Legal Standing

In delivering advice, Justice Enny Nurbaningsih observed that the petition examines a large number of laws and provisions, emphasizing the need to consider procedural requirements related to the formation of administrative regions. “Refer to Constitutional Court rulings on territorial formation, as this type of review typically concerns regional heads, whose filings must be accompanied by DPRD approval. Here, the petitioner’s standing as an individual citizen lacks clear constitutional harm,” Justice Enny stated.

Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh noted the petitioner’s request that the relocation of the national capital (IKN) be implemented immediately. However, he emphasized that the petition, which invoked fifteen constitutional benchmarks as the basis for reviewing numerous provisions, required clearer elaboration.

“The petition’s posita, petitum, and underlying arguments remain very limited, and the causal relationship between them has yet to be established. Build a stronger line of reasoning so that the petition’s demands become clearer,” Justice Daniel explained.

 

Justice Arief Hidayat additionally underscored the need to demonstrate how the challenged norms cause or could cause constitutional harm. “Be precise in addressing legal standing for each statute challenged. These aspirations may be better conveyed through local government channels rather than as an individual claim. Review your petition in light of Constitutional Court Regulation No. 7 of 2025 (PMK 7/2025),” Arief advised.

Before adjourning, presiding Justice Arief Hidayat granted the petitioner 14 days to revise the petition. The revision must be submitted no later than Monday, 3 November 2025, at 12:00 WIB. The Court will then schedule a follow-up hearing to review the revised petition.

Case tracking: Case No. 187/PUU-XXIII/2025

Author: Sri Pujianti.

Editor: N. Rosi.

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.

---