The Police Law is Appealed to the Constitutional Court, the Applicant Values Its Formation as a Formil

JAKARTA - A researcher and a student filed a judicial review lawsuit to the Constitutional Court (MK) against Law Number 5 of 2026 concerning the Third Amendment to Law Number 2 of 2002 concerning the National Police of the Republic of Indonesia (Polri). In his application, the two applicants asked the Constitutional Court to postpone the enforcement of the National Police Law because it was considered formally flawed.

The applicants are Zulfikar Putra Utama, a researcher at the Indonesia Parliamentary Center (IPC), and Muhammad Ezra Suhaeri, a student and chairman of the Student Senate of the State Islamic University (UIN) Syarif Hidayatullah Jakarta.

Quoted by Antara, Thursday, July 9, the application was registered with Case Number 251/PUU-XXIV/2026. Based on the preliminary hearing memorandum published on the MK's official website, the applicants argued that the formation of the Polri Law did not meet the provisions for the formation of laws as stipulated in the 1945 Constitution (UUD).

They assessed that the process of forming the Police Law ignored a number of important principles in the formation of legislation, such as the principle of openness, the principle of usefulness and usefulness, and public participation.

According to the applicant, the formation of a law must go through five stages, namely planning, drafting, discussion, ratification, and promulgation.

They explained that the Polri bill was a DPR initiative proposal so that based on Article 46 paragraph (2) of the Law on the Formation of Regulations (UU P3) and Article 129 of the DPR Regulation Number 1 of 2020, it should first go through the process of harmonization, rounding, and strengthening the concept by the Legislative Agency (Baleg).

According to the applicant, harmonization is a mandatory stage to ensure the alignment, consistency, and integration of a draft law with the national legal system.

"Your Majesty, because harmonization is a mandatory stage and a gateway before a bill obtains legitimacy as a formal DPR proposal, the quality of the implementation of harmonization has a direct influence on the quality of the overall legislative process," said Zulfikar in the trial.

The applicant also stated that he found out that the Police Bill did not go through the harmonization process at Baleg before it was determined as a DPR initiative proposal in the plenary session on May 20, 2026.

"The preparation of the Polri bill does not involve Baleg at all to carry out its harmonization function," said the applicant.

According to them, this condition causes Baleg not to carry out its constitutional function to maintain the quality of the legislative process.

Through their petition, the applicants asked the Constitutional Court to grant a provisional application in the form of a postponement of the implementation of the Police Law. They also asked the Constitutional Court to declare the formation of Law Number 5 of 2026 contrary to the 1945 Constitution because it did not meet the procedures for the formation of laws.

The preliminary hearing was held on Tuesday, July 7, led by Chief Justice Suhartoyo, accompanied by Constitutional Judges M. Guntur Hamzah and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.

During the trial, M. Guntur Hamzah asked the applicants to clarify the legal standing, especially the status of Applicant I as an individual or as an IPC researcher, and the legal standing of Applicant II in submitting a formal test.

Meanwhile, the Chairman of the Constitutional Court Suhartoyo also provided notes regarding the inclusion of the Employment Creation Law in the application.

"The Police Law has never been associated with Ciptaker. It is from us, apart from Prof. Guntur and His Excellency Mr. Daniel," said Suhartoyo.

The court gave time to the applicants to improve their application until Monday, July 20.