Petitioner’s legal counsel delivering the main points of the revised petition on the material review of the Job Creation Law on Wednesday (24/6). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

Jakarta (MKRI) - The Constitutional Court (MK) resumed hearings on the judicial review of the Elucidation of Article 156 under the Elucidation of Article 81 point 47 of the Annex to Law No. 6 of 2023 on the Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 2 of 2022 on Job Creation into Law (Job Creation Law) on Wednesday, June 24, 2026. The second hearing in Case No. 192/PUU-XXIV/2026 was scheduled to examine the petitioner's revised petition.

Muhammad Hafidz, representing petitioner Dianto Isnan Laksono Putra, explained that the petitioner had amended the provision being challenged. "We have changed the provision under review to the word 'shall' in the main text of Article 156 paragraph (1), under Article 81 point 47 of the Annex to Law No. 6 of 2023," Hafidz told the panel of justices chaired by Chief Justice Suhartoyo.

Regarding the constitutional harm allegedly suffered by the petitioner, Hafidz explained that it is directly connected to the word "shall" in the challenged provision. "This is because the provision merely stipulates that employers are obligated to pay severance compensation, but it does not provide a mechanism to ensure the fulfillment of that obligation when an employer is unable to make the payment. As a result, workers receive only normative legal certainty, that is, recognition that the right exists, but not substantive legal certainty, namely a guarantee that the right will actually be received by the worker," Hafidz said.

Also read:

Not Receiving Severance Pay, Laid-Off Worker Challenges the Job Creation Law

In a previous hearing, Dianto Isnan Laksono Putra, a laid-off worker, submitted a material review of the Elucidation of Article 156 on the Elucidation of Article 81 point 47 of the Annex to the Job Creation Law.  The Petitioner worked at PT Propernas Griya Utama from March 1, 2015, until being laid off on December 6, 2024, due to efficiency measures following the company's unhealthy financial conditions. As a worker who has been laid off, the Petitioner bases his constitutional rights on Article 28D paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, which guarantees every person’s right to work and to receive fair and decent compensation and treatment in the workplace.

In the petition, the Petitioner argues that his constitutional right is violated by the enactment of the Elucidation of Article 56 in the Elucidation of Article 81 point 47 of the Annex of the Job Creation Law, which, according to the Petitioner, does not provide adequate regulations or protections regarding employers’ obligations to pay severance pay, service awards, and compensation for lost entitlements following layoffs, even though the Industrial Relations Court and the Supreme Court have ordered PT Propernas Griya Utama to pay the Petitioner’s entitlements.

Due to PT Propernas Griya Utama’s failure to pay the Petitioner’s entitlements, the Petitioner’s financial condition has continued to deteriorate since the end of 2024, and the Petitioner is now trapped in a never-ending cycle of online loans. The Petitioner believes that if the petition is granted, the constitutional harm resulting from the loss of the right to fair and just compensation in the employment relationship will no longer occur.

Based on that argument, the Petitioner requests that the Court provide a constitutional interpretation to guarantee severance pay and to declare the tested provision to not have binding legal force conditionally as long as it is not interpreted as to guarantee the certainty of payment of workers’ rights to severance pay and/or service awards and compensation for rights that should have been received; therefore, the Termination of Employment Compensation Guarantee Program was established.

Case tracking: Petition No. 192/PUU-XXIV/2026 (in Indonesian)

Author: Ilham W.M.

Editor: Lulu Anjarsari P.

PR: Fauzan Febriyan

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.