Decision/Decree Pronouncement Hearing of Case No. 221/PUU-XXIII/2025 on the material judicial review of Law No. 1of 1970 on Occupational Safety, Wednesday (17/12). Photo by MKRI/Bay.

---

Jakarta (MKRI) – The Constitutional Court granted the withdrawal of petition submitted by Petitioner Syamsul Jahidin on the material 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. The Decree Pronouncement Hearing No. 221/PUU-XXIII/2025 was held on Wednesday, December 17, 2025.

During the hearing, Chief Justice Suhartoyo stated that the Court had received a letter from the Petitioner regarding the withdrawal of his petition. The Court also confirmed during the hearing that the Petitioner had essentially confirmed the withdrawal or retraction of the petition in question.

Subsequently, at the Justices' Deliberation Meeting on December 2, 9, and 10, 2025, it was determined that the withdrawal of the petition was legally justified and that the petitioner could not resubmit the petition in question. Furthermore, the Justices’ Deliberation Meeting ordered the registrar to record the withdrawal of the petition in the E-BRPK and return copies of the petition files to the petitioners.

“Granting the withdrawal of Petition Number 221/PUU-XXIII/2025,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo.

Also read:

Weak Sanctions for Occupational Safety Violations

Petition on Occupational Safety Law Withdrawn

During the first hearing, Syamsul stated that the enactment of the law leads to the loss of an individual’s right to safety and guarantees for a healthy environment as a basic need. 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).”

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.

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).”

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.

---