Petitioner's legal counsel at the petition revision hearing for Case No. 180/PUU-XXIII/2025 for the Material Judicial Review of Law No. 32 of 2014 on Maritime Affairs, on Thursday (10/23/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bay.
JAKARTA (MKRI) – The hearing for Case No. 180/PUU-XXIII/2025 on the material judicial review of Law No. 32 of 2014 on Maritime Affairs (Marine Law) filed by Lukman Ladjoni, was held again at the Constitutional Court (MK) on Thursday, October 23, 2025. The panel hearing was chaired by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra together with Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah and Constitutional Justice Arsul Sani in the Plenary Courtroom, Building 1 of the Court. The hearing agenda was to hear the main points of the Petitioner's petition revision.
The revision of the Petitioner's petition include additional authority of the Court, additional legal standing of the Petitioner and constitutional losses experienced by the Petitioner. In addition, the Petitioner changed the articles submitted for material review in the reasons for the petition. Initially, the articles challenged were Article 59 paragraph (3), Article 60, Article 61, Article 63 paragraph (1), Article 63 paragraph (2), and Article 67. Then there were additions and reductions, namely Article 59 paragraph (3) which was challenged to Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 27 paragraph (2), Article 28D, and Article 30 paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.
"Article 61 of the Maritime Law is being challenged to Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 30 paragraph (3) and paragraph (4) of the 1945 NRI Constitution; Article 62 letter c of the Maritime Law is being challenged to Article 27 paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1), and Article 30 paragraph (4) of the 1945 NRI Constitution; Article 63 paragraph (1) letter b of the Maritime Law is being challenged to Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 28D paragraph (1), and Article 30 paragraph (3) and paragraph (4) of the 1945 NRI Constitution. We are also making changes to the petitum," said Dusri Mulyadi as the Petitioner's legal counsel who was present in person in the Plenary Courtroom, Building 1 of the Court.
Also read:
Petitioner Questions Bakamla's Authority
For your information, the petition for Case No. 180/PUU-XXIII/2025 was filed by Lukman Ladjoni (Petitioner). This case challenges Article 59 paragraph (3), Article 60, Article 61, Article 63 paragraph (1), Article 63 paragraph (2), and Article 67 of the Maritime Affairs Law. Article 59 paragraph (3) of the Maritime Affairs Law states, "In order to enforce the law in Indonesian waters and jurisdictional areas, particularly in carrying out security and safety patrols in Indonesian waters and jurisdictional areas, a Maritime Security Agency shall be established."
In the first preliminary hearing at the Court on Friday, October 10, 2025, Dusri Mulyadi as the Petitioner's legal counsel revealed that the provision is a direct legal basis that provides legitimacy to the actions of the Maritime Security Agency (Bakamla) which are open and unmeasured, which ultimately poses a threat to the protection of constitutional rights and legal certainty for the Petitioner.
In a concrete case, on July 31, 2024, a vessel belonging to the Petitioner's company was seized by Bakamla in "Operation Trawl Manguni IV-24". This was due to administrative findings, such as the absence of a CLC Bunker certificate and expired safety equipment, which are not classified as criminal violations, but rather administrative violations. Then, Bakamla officers in a Warrant ordered the Captain of KM. Suryani Ladjoni to depart for Bitung Port no later than August 1, 2024, for further inspection. In short, Bakamla detained the KM. Suryani Ladjoni along with the ship's documents and equipment as well as the captain and 17 crew members.
According to the Petitioner, the detention of the ship by Bakamla not only caused material and operational losses, but also the Petitioner's constitutional rights as the ship owner as a legal subject to obtain legal protection, legal certainty and justice as guaranteed in Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. "The presence of Bakamla in Law No. 32 of 2014 on Maritime Affairs creates legal uncertainty for shipping business actors because it violates the provisions of the law that clearly define the investigative authority of each institution, such as the KPLP, Customs, and others, which require inspections to be carried out at the port, not during sailing," said Dusri.
The Petitioner considers Bakamla not an investigator as stated in Article 1 number 1 of the Criminal Procedure Code and Presidential Decree No.178 of 2014 also states that it does not have the legal authority to form an investigative agency, let alone carry out the detention and seizure of vessels without a delegation from an official investigator or a court order as required by criminal procedure law. Thus, the act of detaining and seizing vessels without reason is clearly considered to violate the principles of legality and due process of law guaranteed by the constitution and damages the national maritime law system.
Therefore, the Petitioner requests that the Court declare Article 59 paragraph (3), Article 60, Article 61, Article 63 paragraph (1), Article 63 paragraph (2), and Article 67 of the Maritime Affairs Law to be contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and have no binding legal force.
The Petitioner also requests that the Court order the legislators to draft a special law concerning Bakamla within a maximum of two years from the date of this decision. If the legislators fail to fulfill this obligation within two years, Bakamla will have no legal basis and all of its operational functions will be rendered inoperable.
Track case No. 180/PUU-XXIII/2025
Author : Sri Pujiati
Editor : N. Rosi.
PR : Fauzan F.
Translator : Donny Yuniarto
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.
Thursday, October 23, 2025 | 15:48 WIB 191