JAKARTA - President Joko Widodo (Jokowi) inaugurated Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation. The irony is that the copy that Jokowi signed is flawed. Lots of editorial mistakes. The Palace clarified, calling it a mere maladministration. A clarification that is even more ironic than the error itself. The community continues to be fooled by the practice of "dumbing down". It is like a weapon for eating, sir, because now the people in the government are showing their own capacity.
Jokowi's signed copies totaled 1,187 pages. This figure is different from the final draft version of the People's Representative Council (DPR) which was submitted to Jokowi on October 14, which amounted to 812 pages. Regarding editorial errors on the 1,187 pages that Jokowi signed, so far we have noted some irregularities.
First, Article 6 in the Chapter "Increasing the Ecosystem of Investments and Business Activities". The article reads: Improvement of the investment ecosystem and business activities as referred to in Article 5 Paragraph (1) letter a includes:
(a) application of risk-based business licensing;
(b) simplification of basic business licensing requirements;
(c) simplification of sector business licensing;
(d) simplification of investment requirements.
However, the reference to Article 5 paragraph (1) is wrong because Article 5 does not have a derivative. Article 5 only reads, "the scope as referred to in Article 4 covers the legal fields regulated in the relevant law."
Furthermore, the irregularities are contained in Article 175 in the Chapter "Implementation of Government Administration to Support Job Creation". Article 175 point 6 amends Article 53 of the Government Administration Law Number 30 of 2014. Article 53 consists of five paragraphs that regulate the legal requirements for government decisions which details read:
Paragraph (1): the time limit for the obligation to determine and / or take decisions and / or actions is given in accordance with statutory provisions.
Paragraph (2): if the provisions of the statutory regulations do not specify the time limit for obligations as referred to in paragraph (1), government agencies and / or officials are obliged to determine and / or make decisions and / or actions within 5 working days after the application. received completely by government agencies and / or officials.
Paragraph (3): in the event that the application is processed through an electronic system and all requirements in the electronic system and all requirements in the electronic system have been fulfilled, the electronic system shall determine decisions and / or actions as decisions or actions of authorized government bodies or officials.
Paragraph (4): if within the time limit as referred to in paragraph (2), government agencies and / or officials do not determine and / or make decisions and / or actions, the application is considered legally granted.
Paragraph (5): Further provisions regarding the form of stipulation of decisions and / or actions that are considered legally granted as referred to in paragraph (3) are regulated in a Presidential Regulation.
Then, where is the oddity? That is, the provisions in paragraph (5) should refer to paragraph (4). Meanwhile, in the Job Creation Law, written refers to paragraph (3).
A classic typoTuesday afternoon, November 3, Minister of State Secretariat (Mensesneg) Pratikno admitted that there were technical mistakes in the writing of the Job Creation Law. Pratikno said that this mistake would not affect the implementation of the Job Creation Law.
"Today we found a technical error in writing in Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation. However, this mistake is administrative in nature so that it does not affect the implementation of the Job Creation Law," said Pratikno in a written statement. We note this as the first "dumbing down" in the context of a typo in the Manuscript of the Job Creation Law. Why?
This error has not had an effect on the implementation of the Job Creation Law, as stated by Pratikno. Constitutional law expert, Bivitri Susanti, said that any errors recorded in the Job Creation Law could cause problematic points to not be implemented. Thus, Pratikno's narrative is refuted.
"What is the legal impact? Articles that are already known to be wrong cannot be implemented. Because in law, an article cannot be executed according to the imagination of the applicant of the article. It must be exactly as written," said Bivitri, Tuesday, November 3.
And to take this matter as mere maladministration is a mistake. Making laws is not a matter of play. The implications are broad regarding the lives of many people. Bivitri said, "It is very important (the maturation of the Law), so that the theory of legal fiction is known, where once it is announced, no one can admit that he does not know that the law exists so that he can avoid the obligation to implement the law."
Bivitri also said that any mistakes in a law that has been passed cannot be changed just like that. The President must issue a Government Regulation in Lieu of a Law (Perppu) to issue these problematic articles.
"If it's just an agreement, it can be envoyed, by signing all parties on the side. If it can't be done in law, it is not allowed according to Law Number 12 of 2011. And practically it is impossible for all DPR members and presidents to be attached to the side," said Bivitri. .
What Pratikno said was similar to what the government did last February. We note this as the second "dumbing down". At that time the Job Creation Law was still a draft. There was a point that was also highlighted by the public at that time, namely Article 170.At that time, Article 170 of the Work Creation Omnibus Law Bill reads:
Paragraph (1): In order to accelerate the implementation of the work copyright strategic policy as referred to in Article 4 paragraph (1), based on this Law the Central Government has the authority to amend the provisions of this Law and / or change the provisions in the Law which are not amended. in this Law.
Paragraph (2): Amendments to the provisions referred to in paragraph (1) shall be regulated by a Government Regulation, "reads Article 170 paragraph 2.
Paragraph (3): In the framework of stipulating the Government Regulation as referred to in paragraph (2), the Central Government may consult with the leadership of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia.
This point is a problem because it provides space for the government to replace the contents of the law with government regulations (PP) or presidential regulations (Perpres). At that time the government said the mistake was just a typo. The Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs (Menkopolhukam) Mahfud MD at that time called this mistake a common thing.
"If the contents of the Act are replaced by PPs, replaced by Perpres, it cannot. Maybe it was a typo," said Mahfud.
The Minister of Law and Human Rights (Menkum HAM) Yasonna Laoly complemented Mahfud, saying that there was no bad intention of the government to cheat in inserting this article. Yasonna at that time passed the responsibility for changing the points to the DPR.
Indeed, at that time the hot ball discussing the Law was in the hands of the DPR. "Yes, yes, the PP can't go against the law ... It doesn't need to be (fixed) because later in the DPR it will be fixed," said Yasonna.
In the latest copy of 1,187 pages endorsed by Jokowi, Article 170 is deleted.
Apart from various other problems, a typo is one of the things that is not right. Since the beginning, this legal umbrella was in the form of a draft, even when it was passed into law by the signature of RI-1. And the government's response remains the same: take it as if it is trivial.
In political theory, the actions that the government displays in this context are known as "dumbing downs". The government is playing with the psychology of the masses to form a false reality in the heads of the people by presenting things that are clearly absurd.
In one or two shows, maybe the public is still awake by its criticism. However, when these patterns continue to be carried out, the psychology of society will eventually be distracted by informing them.
British writer Ivo Mosley describes the practice and purpose of "dumbing down" in his writing. Mosley describes "dumbing down" as a long-term attempt by the authorities to control their people through psychological interventions.
"The state takes a kind of abstract reality in our minds, makes us stop questioning the things that people do with the power we give (through the democratic process) and let them exercise power over us," he added in an article entitled Dumbing Down Democracy. was part of an essay book entitled "Dumbing Down: Culture, Politics and the Mass Media" released in 2000.
The practice of "dumbing down" is agreed by political observer Universitas Al Azhar Indonesia (UAI), Ujang Komarudin. According to Ujang, there were structured efforts by the government to gradually master mass psychology.
According to Ujang, the ultimate goal of the dumbing down practice is to weaken public control. Apathy increased, criticism decreased. Weakening public control will make the government more free to pass legal products or policies that are actually problematic.
However, today the "dumbing down" attempt proved unsuccessful, and even became a weapon for you. The community, which is hoped to be lulled by declarations, is actually getting smarter and more honed. Interestingly, what has built public criticism is the massive dumbing down effort carried out by the government itself.
"The people already understand. They have often been fooled. Because the people are often fooled, the people become aware. Nowadays the people are smart, they can distinguish between wrong and right." Said Ujang, contacted by VOI, Tuesday, November 3.
The mistakes made by the government in the formation of the Job Creation Law even exacerbated the government's position in the eyes of the community. "These mistakes have destroyed the government's credibility in the eyes of the people. Because the people will see, the government cannot take care of the country."
"Currently, the government has lost its mind. Due to its insignificant performance, it has become the target of criticism from the public."
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)
