Petitioner Syamsul Jahidin delivering the main points of the judicial review petition on Law No. 1 of 1970 on Work Safety online. Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) – University student and security officer (satpam) Syamsul Jahidin has filed a petition for judicial review of Article 15 paragraph (2) of Law No. 1 of 1970 on Occupational Safety against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia to the Constitutional Court (MK). In Petition No. 221/PUU-XXIII/2025, Syamsul Jahidin (petitioner) challenges the provision on the ground that the relatively light sanctions for work safety violations are no longer relevant to current developments.

“With advances in technology, evolving safety standards and requirements, as well as growing environmental, social, and international demands, in substance this situation leads to the loss of an individual’s right to safety and guarantees for a healthy environment as a basic need, which are in principle guaranteed by the 1945 Constitution and include the petitioner himself,” Syamsul stated, appearing virtually at the preliminary hearing on Monday, November 24, 2025.

Article 15 paragraph (2) of the Occupational Safety Law reads: “The legislation referred to in paragraph (1) may impose criminal sanctions for violations of its provisions in the form of imprisonment for a maximum of 3 (three) months or a fine of up to Rp100,000 (one hundred thousand rupiah).” In his view, this article is inconsistent with Article 28H paragraph (1), Article 28H paragraph (2), Article 28H paragraph (3), and Article 34 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

Syamsul, who also identifies himself as an occupational safety and health (K3) officer and auditor, stated that he has no legal certainty in enforcing occupational safety principles due to the absence of clear guarantees for safety officers to notify agency or company management of the importance of implementing K3. As a result, the Petitioner claims to suffer both actual and reasonably certain potential harm, as it undermines the effectiveness of human rights protection in the context of labor standards.

Syamsul emphasized that the implementation of K3 and public safety in general must be a priority concern for all stakeholders, including the government, business and industry, professionals, experts, observers, academics, and the wider community, to minimize losses and enhance national competitiveness globally. Citing data from the Employment Social Security Agency (BPJS Ketenagakerjaan), he noted that the number of workplace accidents increased from 221,740 cases in 2020 to 234,270 in 2021, and reached 265,334 from November 2022 through 2023.

He pointed out that, pursuant to Article 28H paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, every person has the right to social security that enables the full development of his or her dignity as a human being. However, the weak sanctions under the Work Safety Law run counter to the government’s policy mandating the implementation of occupational safety and health management systems for companies employing more than 100 workers or operating in high-risk sectors.

In his petitum, the petitioner asks the Court to declare Article 15 paragraph (2) of the Occupational Safety Law unconstitutional and without binding legal force, or to declare it conditionally unconstitutional insofar as it is not interpreted to read: “The legislation referred to in paragraph (1) may impose criminal sanctions for violations of its provisions in the form of imprisonment for a maximum of 4 (four) years or a fine of up to Rp100,000,000 (one hundred million rupiah).”

The petition was heard by a Panel of Justices chaired by Chief Justice Suhartoyo, accompanied by Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah. During the advisory session, Justice Guntur highlighted the issue of the petitioner’s legal standing, in light of Syamsul’s claim to be a nationally certified K3 officer and auditor in relation to the subject of this petition.

“Actually, what is Mr. Syamsul Jahidin’s occupation here? Previously, he appeared as a student, then as an advocate, then as a security guard. Now he comes as a K3 officer; is this accurate?” Justice Guntur asked.

Meanwhile, Justice Daniel observed that the petitioner had not yet demonstrated specific losses suffered. In his view, the norm at issue in fact has a more direct impact on workers.

“And in elaborating the constitutional harm in relation to the Constitution, the alleged violation of constitutional rights still needs to be strengthened by clearly contrasting it with the challenged norm, especially since there are quite many provisions being tested as the basis of review,” Justice Daniel added.

Before adjourning the session, Chief Justice Suhartoyo stated that the petitioner was given 14 days to amend the petition. The soft and hard copies of the revised document must be submitted to the Court no later than Monday, December 8, 2025.

Case tracking

Author: Mimi Kartika.

Editor: N. Rosi

PR: Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina.

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.

---