Chief Justice Suhartoyo (right) chairing a hearing for the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2020 on the Constitutional Court for case No. 210/PUU-XXIII/2025 alongside Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra (left), Monday (11/24/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held the second material judicial review hearing of Law No. 7 of 2020 on the Third Amendment to Law No. 24 of 2003 on Wednesday, December 10, 2025. The hearing for case No. 210/PUU-XXIII/2025 was set for the testimonies of the House of Representatives (DPR) and the Government.

However, both the House and the Government asked for the hearing to be postponed. “Today’s hearing was supposed to be the presentation of statements by the House and the Government. The Court has received a request to postpone this hearing. However, the panel of justices is not yet able to determine the next hearing date, and it will first be rescheduled and [the involved parties] will be informed once it has been confirmed. Thank you the Petitioners, representatives of the House and the Government/President, as well as everyone attending today’s hearing for your presence,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo.

Also read:

Citizens Ask to Be Able to File Petitions on Institutional Authority Dispute

Petitioners Seeking to File Petition on Institutional Authority Dispute Affirm Legal Standing

Marzuki Darusman, Fatia Nadia, Muhammad Busyro Muqoddas, and Trisno Raharjo (Petitioners I-IV) challenge Article 61 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law. They believe it is inconsistent with Article 24C paragraph (1), Article 28D paragraph (1), and Article 281 paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution. Article 61 paragraph (1) provides that “A petitioner shall be a state institution whose authority is granted by the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and which has a direct interest in the disputed authority.”

The Petitioners contend that in exercising its authority to resolve disputes over the powers of state institutions, the Court has demonstrated its ability to concretely decide issues of authority arising between two state institutions. Therefore, to enhance the significance of this authority, the Court should also allow citizens to submit petitions regarding disputes over the powers of state institutions—particularly where such powers have factually and specifically resulted in constitutional harm to citizens.

Based on these arguments, the Petitioners assert that citizens should also have the right to submit petitions disputing the authority of state institutions (vide Article 10 paragraph (1) letter b), which limits who may act as petitioners, and Article 61 paragraph (1) further specifies that only state institutions may do so. In short, such provisions restrict citizens’ right to defend their constitutional rights.

Therefore, the Petitioners request that the Court provide an interpretation and clarification as to who may file a constitutional complaint. Accordingly, any citizen whose constitutional rights have been violated by a state institution in the exercise of its authority should be able to file a constitutional complaint regarding disputes over the powers of state institutions.

Explore case No. 210/PUU-XXIII/2025 (in Indonesian).

Author         : Sri Pujianti
Editor          : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR               : Fauzan Febriyan
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.

---