JAKARTA - The organizer of the HighScope Indonesia School was sued to the South Jakarta District Court in Case Number 43/Pdt.G.S/2026/PN JKT.SEL. The lawsuit was filed by one of the students with a demand value of only Rp. 100.
Although the value is very small, this lawsuit questions something more fundamental, namely the status of Foreign Education Institutions (LPA) and the implementation of the HighScope Indonesia Cooperative Education School (SPK) which is said to need to be reviewed for its appropriateness with the provisions of laws and regulations.
One of the rules that is of concern in this case is the Ministry of Education and Culture Decree Number 31 of 2014 concerning Cooperation in the Implementation and Management of Education by Foreign Education Institutions with Educational Institutions in Indonesia.
In the document of concern to the plaintiff, PT HighScope Indonesia is listed as LPA. The plaintiff then questioned whether the status had met the requirements as a foreign educational institution as stipulated in the regulation on the implementation of the SPK.
The question was then linked to the existence of the HighScope Educational Research Foundation (HSERF) in the United States which is known to have a focus on early childhood education.
This condition raises questions about the basis of foreign educational cooperation used in the implementation of HighScope Indonesia education at the elementary, middle, and high school levels.
For the plaintiffs, the issue is not merely related to administrative aspects. Parents as parties who entrust the education of children to schools also have an interest in obtaining clear information regarding the status of the institution, the basis of cooperation, and the implementation of education.
The lawyer for the parents, Chandra Gobha, assessed that the value of the lawsuit of Rp. 100 must be seen from the context of the issue in question.
According to Chandra, the nominal amount is not the measure of the loss that the parents want to pursue. The lawsuit is more directed at testing the issue of legal compliance and transparency in the provision of education.
"In this context, the figure of Rp100 can be understood as an affirmation that the main interest of the plaintiff is not to gain financial profit from the school, but to obtain clarity regarding the status and basis of the implementation of education carried out by the school," Chandra said in his statement, Thursday, August 13.
Chandra can also put this case in a broader perspective. According to him, the relationship between schools and parents is not just a relationship between educational service providers and service users. There is an inherent trust because parents entrust the process of education and child development to educational institutions.
Therefore, information regarding the status of the institution, the form of cooperation with foreign educational institutions, as well as the legal basis for the operation of schools is an important part that he believes parents need to know publicly.
"From a legal perspective, the issue to be tested through the lawsuit is whether the status and practice of education carried out are in accordance with the applicable regulations," said the lawyer from Sikka Regency, NTT.
The question, said Chandra in his analysis, should not be seen as an attempt to attack the existence of schools. Rather, certainty about the status and legal basis of the provision of education is needed so that all parties, including schools and parents, have a clear foothold.
The value of the lawsuit of Rp. 100 is also said not to be intended as a representation of material losses. The figure is emphasized as a symbol that this case is not oriented towards financial claims, but rather on issues of clarity, transparency, and integrity in the provision of education.
Schools teach children the importance of telling the truth, valuing openness, and maintaining integrity. Thus, the question arises whether the same principles should also be the standard in the relationship between schools and parents.
For Chandra, educational integrity is not only reflected in what is taught to students in the classroom, but also in how educational institutions run governance and hold their status and activities accountable to stakeholders.
The question that then arises is whether the status of LPA used by HighScope Indonesia has been in accordance with the Ministry of Education Decree Number 31 of 2014, and whether information regarding the status and cooperation has been made public to parents.
This matter is now recorded at the South Jakarta District Court. The trial process will be a space to test the arguments submitted by the plaintiff and the evidence owned by each party.
Thus, the Rp100 lawsuit was ultimately not just a matter of the nominal demand. It brings a more fundamental question about transparency, compliance with regulations, and the accountability of educational institutions to parents.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
