AMPHURI Submit Judicial Review of Law Number 14 of 2026, Judge Requests to Improve the Complaint Draft
JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court, headed by Saldi Isra, asked the applicant (AMPHURI) to complete the judicial review lawsuit if he wanted the case to continue.
The first trial of the material test or judicial review filed by the applicant (AMPHURI - Association of Muslim Haji and Umrah Organizers of the Republic of Indonesia) was held on Monday, February 9, 2026. The Constitutional Court judge, chaired by Saldi Isra, accompanied by Member Judges Ridwan Mansyur and Adies Kadir, ordered the applicant to complete the lawsuit.
"Please complete the applicant's lawsuit and submit it to the Constitutional Court no later than February 23, 2026 at 24.00 WIB," he said before concluding the hearing.
On that occasion, Saldi also asked the applicant to reconsider whether the lawsuit wanted to be withdrawn, continued, or continued by revising the judicial review lawsuit material for several articles in Law Number 14 of 2026 concerning the Third Amendment to Law Number 8 of 2019 concerning the Implementation of the Hajj and Umrah.
After the trial, the General Chair of the DPP AMPHURI, Firman Muhammad Nur, said that his party, as Applicant I, which is part of the Coalition for Protecting the Umrah and Hajj Worship Ecosystem, filed a judicial review of Law Number 14 of 2026 concerning Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28D paragraph (1), Article 28G paragraph (1), Article 28I paragraph (4), and Article 29 paragraph (2) of the Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (UUD 1945).
Meanwhile, Firman Adi Candra as the applicant's legal representative said that the absence of the definition of "Independent Umrah" in Article 1 of Law Number 14 of 2026 concerning the Implementation of the Hajj and Umrah was contrary to Article 27 paragraph (1) and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. According to Firman Candra, the absence of the definition has a direct implication on the pattern of implementation of the umrah, the legal relationship between the pilgrims and the PPIU, and the state's responsibility in protecting the umrah pilgrims.
"That due to legal uncertainty as outlined above, Article 1 of Law Number 14 of 2026 concerning the Third Amendment to Law Number 8 of 2019 concerning the Implementation of the Hajj and Umrah is contrary to Article 27 paragraph (1) and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution as long as it is not interpreted to contain a definition of Independent Umrah in a clear, clear, and specific way," explained Firman Candra.
In accordance with the direction of the MK judge, Firman continued that his party would complete the lawsuit as ordered. "Hopefully the time given to us is enough to complete the lawsuit for this judicial review," he concluded.