The Law On Job Creation Is Unconstitutional By The Constitutional Court, The Legislative Council Criticizes Jokowi: I Don't Agree With The Government's Interpretation

DPR RI Building (Photo: Irfan Meidianto/VOI)

JAKARTA - Member of the Legislative Council of the Republic of Indonesia from the PKS faction, Mulyanto hopes that the government will not make its own interpretation after the decision of the Constitutional Court which annulled the Job Creation Act. It is known that the Constitutional Court stated that the law was conditionally unconstitutional.

Mulyanto assesses that President Joko Widodo's statement regarding the Job Creation Law is still valid because there is not a single article that has been canceled, it is not correct. According to him, the government should respect and follow the decision of the Constitutional Court in its entirety and not force the will to continue to implement the Job Creation Act.

“I do not agree with the Government's interpretation. We need to be careful and complete in reading the text of the Constitutional Court's decision," Mulyanto told reporters, Wednesday, December 1. A former member of the Working Committee on the Job Creation Law from PKS explained that the Constitutional Court's decision was very clear asking the lawmakers to review and revise the Ciptaker Law thoroughly. material during the process of formally reforming the Copyright Act.

The Constitutional Court, Mulyanto said, also ordered the government to suspend all strategic actions/policies that have a broad impact on the community in order to avoid a bigger impact than the enforcement of the Copyright Law. material. The reason is that the first decision of the Constitutional Court is that it is formal. Then, the Constitutional Court did not or did not conduct a material review of the Copyright Act.

"So the Constitutional Court did not decide certain articles to be annulled. Thus the statement, 'that not a single article was canceled by the Constitutional Court' is irrelevant," Mulyanto explained. strategic and broad impact for the community in the Copyright Act to be suspended.

"The Constitutional Court did not explicitly cancel this law materially, but regarding strategic matters and had a broad impact, the Court ordered that the implementation of the Ciptaker Law be suspended, to avoid a bigger impact on society," said Mulyanto. Mulyanto then quoted Legal Considerations. No. (3.20.5) page 414 of the Constitutional Court which states:

"That in order to avoid a greater impact on the enactment of Law 11/2020 during the 2 (two) year grace period, the Court also stated that the implementation of Law 11/2020 relating to matters of a strategic nature and having a broad impact should be suspended in advance, including not justifying it. forming new implementing regulations and it is also not allowed for state officials to make strategic policies that can have a broad impact based on the norms of Law 11/2020 which have been formally declared conditionally unconstitutional”.

Then it was reaffirmed in Amar Decision No. 7 page 417: "Declaring to suspend all strategic and broad-impact actions/policies, and it is also not justified to issue new implementing regulations related to Law No. 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation (Gazette Republic of Indonesia Year 2020 Number 245, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6573)".

Third, added Mulyanto, the Constitutional Court asked the legislators to review several controversial substances in society.

"This implies that the Constitutional Court recognizes the need for a review of the substance of the Copyright Law by the legislators and at the same time making efforts to make material improvements when carrying out the process of formally reforming the Ciptaker Law," said Mulyanto.

While in Legal Considerations No. (3.21) page 414, the Constitutional Court stated:

“Considering that without the intention of assessing the material constitutionality of the a quo Law, since many requests for a material review have been filed against the a quo Law, while the Court has not yet tried the a quo Law materially, in making improvements to the process of forming the a quo Law, the legislators have the opportunity to review some of the substances objected to by several community groups”.