The Petitioners and their legal counsels at the second hearing for the judicial review of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code for Case No. 112/PUU-XXIV/2026, Tuesday (4/21/2026). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court held the second hearing for the material judicial review of Article 466 paragraph (1) of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code (KUHP) and its elucidation on Tuesday, April 21, 2026. The Petition No. 112/PUU-XXIV/2026 was filed by Deddy Rizaldy Arwin Gommo and Diorama Tiffany (Petitioners I and II).

This hearing was supposed to examine the revisions to the petition. However, due to delay in the submission of the revised petition to the Court, Deddy Rizaldy Arwin Gommo expressed the Petitioners’ wish to withdraw the petition.

“The [submission of the] revised petition, which should be presented today, was late due to traffic jam,” said Gommo at the panel hearing presided over by Constitutional Justices Enny Nurbaningsih (chair), Asrul Sani, and Adies Kadir.

Hearing the statement, Justice Enny affirmed the withdrawal. “Please submit a letter requesting the withdrawal too,” she added.

Also read: Petitioners Seek Clarification of Element of Assault in New Criminal Code

Article 466 paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code provides: “Any person who commits assault shall be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of 2 (two) years and 6 (six) months or a fine of up to category III.” The elucidation reads, “This provision does not define the meaning of assault, which shall be left to judicial interpretation on the case in accordance with the development of social and cultural values as well as medical science. This means that assault is not limited to physical harm, and not all physical suffering necessarily constitutes assault. The element of ‘intent’ is not explicitly included in this provision, as it is already regulated under Article 36 and Article 54 letter j for the purpose of aggravating punishment.”

At the preliminary hearing on Tuesday, April 7, 2026, Muhammad Danang Pratama, counsel for the Petitioners, argued that the formulation of Article 466 paragraph (1), particularly the phrase “commits assault,” does not provide a definitive parameter within the body of the law. As a result, the core element of the offense depends on the elucidation, which in turn delegates its meaning to judicial interpretation.

In their petitum, the Petitioners requested the Court to declare Article 466 paragraph (1) of Law No. 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as it is not interpreted to read: “Any person who unlawfully or without right commits assault shall be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of 2 (two) years and 6 (six) months or a fine of up to category III.”

They also requested the Court to declare the elucidation to Article 466 paragraph (1) unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as it is not interpreted to mean: “Assault shall be an intentional active act, carried out unlawfully or without right, which results in pain to another person’s body, injury to another person’s body, or a physical health disorder, which can be objectively proven based on medical science.” 

Explore Case No. 112/PUU-XXIV/2026 (in Indonesian).

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : N. Rosi.
PR            : Fauzan 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.

---