Constitutional Court Removes Opportunity For Active Police Occupying Civil Positions, DPR: Don't Rush To Be Implemented

JAKARTA – The Constitutional Court (MK) has granted a judicial review request that removed the phrase "or not based on an assignment from the Chief of Police" from the Explanation of Article 28 paragraph (3) of the National Police Law. MK Decision Number 114/PUU-XXIII/2025 effectively confirms that active police officers holding positions outside the police force are required to resign.

Responding to the ruling, which removes the loophole for active police officers to hold civilian positions without relinquishing their membership status, Rudianto Lallo, member of Commission III of the Indonesian House of Representatives, expressed his respect for the decision, but requested that its implementation not be rushed.

"We respect the Constitutional Court's decision. But it can't be implemented immediately. We must first consider the norms contained in other laws," said Rudianto, as quoted by ANTARA, Friday, November 14, 2025.

Rudianto's Argument: Synergy and Acontrario Legal Logic

Rudianto Lallo explained that although the Constitutional Court had removed the Explanation that served as the basis for the assignment, Law Number 2 of 2002 concerning the Police itself still legitimizes the placement of high-ranking Polri officers outside the institution.

He referred to Article 28 Paragraph (3) of the Polri Law, which states that Polri members can indeed hold positions outside the police force after resigning or retiring. However, he then cited an authentic interpretation of the removed provision.

"This means, based on acontrario legal logic, if the position is related to the duties and functions of the police and is held upon assignment from the Chief of Police, it is still possible for active high-ranking officers to hold that position," he explained.

Rudianto believes that the assignment of Polri officers to other institutions is actually part of the spirit of synergy between institutions mandated by Article 30 Paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution, namely to support the achievement of state goals and strengthen inter-institutional coordination.

MK Removes 'Explanation' That Caused Legal Anomalies

Previously, the Constitutional Court granted the petition of advocate Syamsul Jahidin and student Christian Adrianus Sihite. The petitioners questioned the phrase "or not based on an assignment from the Chief of Police" in the Explanation to Article 28 Paragraph (3) of the Polri Law, claiming it created a legal anomaly.

Chief Justice Suhartoyo emphasized the removal of this phrase in reading the ruling.

"The phrase 'or not based on an assignment from the Chief of Police' in the Explanation to Article 28 Paragraph (3) of Law Number 2 of 2002 concerning the Polri contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and is not legally binding," Suhartoyo said.

With the revocation of this phrase, Article 28 paragraph (3) of the Indonesian National Police Law which states, "Members of the Republic of Indonesia National Police may hold positions outside the police force after resigning or retiring from police service," now has no exception for active assignment from the Chief of Police.