Unable To Work, Students And Persons With Disabilities Sued The Job Creation Law At The Constitutional Court

JAKARTA - Persons with disabilities and students, Putu Bagus Rendragraha and Simon Petrus Simbolon, filed a lawsuit for the formal and material review of Law 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation against the 1945 Constitution to the Constitutional Court (MK).

"The applicants are persons with disabilities where until now they have not found a job," said the attorney for the applicant Eliadi Hulu in case number 4 / PUU-XIX / 2021 which was held by the Constitutional Court in Jakarta in Jakarta as reported by Antara, Wednesday, April 21.

In this case the applicant through his attorney conveyed things that were the object of testing, namely Law number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation and which became the object of material review, including article 24 number 4 which amended the provisions of article 7 of Law 28 of 2002 concerning buildings.

Then article 24 number 13 which removes the provisions of article 16 of Law number 28 of 2002 concerning buildings, article 24 number 4 which abolishes provisions of article 27 of Law number 28 of 2002 concerning buildings.

Furthermore, article 28 which removes the provisions of article 31, article 61 point 7 which amends the provisions of article 29 paragraph 1 letter i of Law number 44 of 2009 concerning Hospitals.

"The Petitioners consider their constitutional rights to have been violated by the existence of the articles I mentioned earlier," he said.

In the petitum, the petitioner conveyed a number of things including asking the Panel of MK Judges to declare Law number 11 of 2020 concerning Work Creation with formal defects and contradicting the Law.

Furthermore, it states that the provisions of the norms in the law that have been amended are removed or declared to have no binding legal force in Law number 11 of 2020 to come into effect again.

Meanwhile, the Panel of Judges of the Constitutional Court Wahiduddin Adams when giving advice to the applicant said that in the case there were things that were unusual, namely related to evidence.

"This is not explaining evidence but saying please we are pitied, this is asking for dispensation, isn't it?" asked the Constitutional Court Judge Wahiduddin Adams.