The Petitioner of Case No. 49/PUU-XXIV/2026 at the ruling hearing for the judicial review of the Child Protection Law, Monday (3/2/2026). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court ruled the material judicial review petition of Article 8 of Law No. 23 of 2002 on Child Protection, as amended by Law No. 35 of 2014, inadmissible. The petition was filed by Moh. Abqori Hisan.

The verdict in Decision No. 49/PUU-XXIV/2026 was delivered by Chief Justice Suhartoyo on Monday, March 2, 2026 in the plenary courtroom. “Petition No. 49/PUU-XXIV/2026 is inadmissible,” he said pronouncing the verdict.

In its legal considerations, the Court found that the Petitioner can no longer be classified as a child. In fact, a child is a legal subject specifically regulated under Article 8 of the Child Protection Law, the provision for which judicial review was sought.

Reading the Court’s legal considerations, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra explained that the Petitioner had claimed to represent the legal interests of children (quad non). However, the Petitioner should have elaborated upon and proven the existence of a direct legal relationship and/or direct interest between himself and the children concerned—for example, by demonstrating that he acts as a guardian of a child or is institutionally active in activities related to the protection of children’s rights.

“Therefore, after examining the description, arguments, and evidence submitted, the Court finds that the alleged legal relationship or direct interest cannot be established by the Petitioner,” he stressed.

Also read:

Fulfillment of Children’s Rights to Health and Nutrition Questioned

Petitioner Clarifies Legal Standing in Case on Child Protection Law

Case No. 49/PUU-XXIV/2026 on the material judicial review of Article 8 of Law No. 23 of 2002 on Child Protection, as amended by Law No. 35 of 2014, was filed by Moh. Abqori Hisan. Article 8 of the Child Protection Law provides: “Every child is entitled to obtain health services and social security in accordance with their physical, mental, spiritual, and social needs.”

At the preliminary hearing on Tuesday, February 10, 2026, the Petitioner, who appeared without legal counsel, stated that the provision a quo does not provide adequate guarantees for the State to actively prevent, address, and remedy children from the impacts of violence and/or discriminatory treatment. As a result, children’s rights—constitutionally imperative and non-derogable—are reduced to merely declaratory norms without effective protection mechanisms, thereby contravening the State’s constitutional obligation to ensure the best interests of the child.

Furthermore, the Petitioner argued that Article 8 of the Child Protection Law constitutes a declaratory and relatively norm, as it does not stipulate concrete obligations of the State and Government that can be measured, supervised, and held legally accountable. Consequently, the fulfillment of children’s rights to health and nutrition depends entirely on government policies that are sectoral, programmatic, and inconsistent across regions. The absence of a binding normative guarantee in Article 8 has resulted in a substantive oversight vacuum in the implementation of children’s rights to health and nutrition. This condition has prevented the establishment of a system capable of reaching all Indonesian children (for all), particularly those in remote, underdeveloped areas and vulnerable groups.

The Petitioner emphasized that the weakness of Article 8 in practice has contributed to the persistence of malnutrition, undernutrition, and stunting among children, which poses the risk of a lost generation. This situation reflects the State’s failure to guarantee children’s right to optimal growth and development as enshrined in Article 28B paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

In his petitums, the Petitioner requested, inter alia, that the Court declare Article 8 of the Child Protection Law conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as it is not interpreted to mean: “The fulfillment of children’s rights to health and nutrition must be implemented with safe protection standards, based on the individual conditions of each child, accompanied by mechanisms for the prevention of health risks, supervision, and state accountability for every policy concerning the fulfillment of children’s nutrition, including policies implemented through government programs.” 

Explore case No. 49/PUU-XXIV/2026 (in Indonesian).

Author         : Utami Argawati
Editor          : N. Rosi
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.

---