The Petitioner at the preliminary hearing for the judicial review of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights for case No. 206/PUU-XXIII/2025, Friday (11/7/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing on the judicial review of Article 5 paragraph (2) of Law No. 39 of 1999 on Human Rights against the 1945 Constitution. The Case No. 206/PUU-XXIII/2025 was heard on Friday, November 7, 2025 by a panel chaired by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra.

At the hearing, Donaldy Christian Langgar stated that the application of Article 5 paragraph (2) of the Human Rights Law had caused him harm as a justice seeker. He argued that judicial proceedings were slow, convoluted, and resulted in both material and immaterial losses.

“[I] suffered losses in time and cost due to a prolonged execution process. The material loss amounted to Rp14.6 million from withheld wages during the delay in execution,” he said.

Court Deemed Not Objective

The Petitioner revealed that the rigid and inflexible judicial system had disadvantaged justice seekers. He believed that overlapping regulations led to inconsistencies in law enforcement and the potential for biased courts. “The Petitioner experienced a subjective and partial court,” he told the panel of justices.

He also recounted his experience since 2019 when he first filed a case, noting differences between in-person and online registration procedures, which caused his case to be initially rejected.

Arguments of the Petition

In his petition, the Petitioner explained that Article 5 paragraph (2) of the Human Rights Law, which guarantees every person the right to assistance and protection from an objective and impartial court, had not been fully implemented in practice. According to him, this contradicts Article 28H paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, which provides that “Every person shall have the right to receive facilities and special treatment to obtain equal opportunities and benefits in order to achieve equality and justice.”

The Petitioner also referred to provisions under Law No. 13 of 2003 on Manpower, particularly concerning the probationary period of employment, which he argued failed to ensure certainty in the employment relationship between workers and employers and was inconsistent with ILO Convention No. 189 of 2011 on Decent Work for Domestic Workers.

Criticism of Judicial Process

The Petitioner argued that the courts had not upheld the principles of “simple, speedy, and low-cost justice.” He stated that he had fulfilled all procedural requirements, including submitting documents, evidence, and a request for prodeo (fee waiver). However, he encountered several obstacles during the process, such as changes in judges without official notification, the failure to receive copies of decisions, and delays of up to eight months for hearings.

He asserted that the courts should provide real protection to justice seekers, not only formal protection but also substantive protection, through the sincere application of the principle ius curia novit.

The Petitioner urged the Constitutional Court to reinterpret Article 5 paragraph (2) of the Human Rights Law to ensure the existence of courts that are truly objective, non-discriminatory, and provide equal treatment to all justice seekers. He believes that the norm in the article should be clarified to align with the principles of justice and the protection of citizens’ constitutional rights as guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution.

In response, Constitutional Justice Ridwan Mansyur advised the Petitioner to revise and improve the petition. “Most parts are not properly written. Please refer to examples so that it can be accepted and not deemed obscure. You may revise it if you wish to proceed,” he said.

The panel gave the Petitioner 14 days to revise the petition. The revised petition must be received by the Court no later than Thursday, November 20, 2025 at 12:00 WIB.

Author         : Utami Argawati
Editor          : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR               : Andhini S.F.
Translator     : Yuniar Widiastuti (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.

---