IKN Law Sued To MK, Government Still Steps On Gas

DPR Plenary Session/Photo: Antara

JAKARTA - The government continues to move the State Capital (IKN) to East Kalimantan even though the law - which has just been hammered out - has been immediately challenged by the Constitutional Court (MK). Those who sued ranged from activists to retired Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI).

The IKN Law was ratified at the 13th DPR-RI plenary session for the 2021-2022 session, last Tuesday, January 18. The approval was made after the discussion was rushed one day and one night.

Special Staff to the Minister of State Secretary, Faldo Maldini, emphasized that the government will continue the IKN-related agenda as long as there is no new legal regulation decided by the court. "The government steps on the gas," said Faldo in Jakarta, Friday, February 4. Even so, he appreciates the parties who made the lawsuit. "Of course, we respect all aspirations. If there are those who feel that they have violated constitutional rights, please sue. The path is already there. However, the law that has been knocked down, must be compiled, its derivatives must go on," he said.

Faldo considered that the lawsuit for the IKN Law must be responded to with good arguments in the trial. However, he is confident that the transfer of IKN will continue smoothly despite the lawsuit against the IKN Law. nationality and hope for the future," concluded Faldo.

Previously, the IKN Law was sued to the Constitutional Court (MK) by a number of residents calling themselves the National Axis of State Sovereignty (PNKN).

PNKN is fronted by former adviser to the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Abdullah Hehamahua, former DPD DKI Jakarta member Marwan Batubara, politician Agung Mozin, Chairman of the MUI Advisory Council Muhyiddin Junaidi, and seven other people.

Reporting from a document uploaded to the MK's official website, the lawsuit was registered on February 2, 2022. The applicants filed a formal test lawsuit against the IKN Law because the formation of the law was deemed not to be in accordance with the laws and regulations.

The formation of the IKN Law is considered not through sustainable planning, starting from development planning documents, regulatory planning, state financial planning, and development implementation.

The petitioners also considered that the formation of the IKN Law did not really pay attention to the material content, because many of the substantial material delegated the state capital to implementing regulations.

"Of the 44 articles in the IKN Law, there are 13 orders for delegation of regulatory authority in the implementing regulations," wrote the applicant.

According to the applicants, the IKN Law was not made because it was really needed. The Petitioner cites the results of a poll from one survey agency which stated that the majority of the people refused to move the capital city of the country. In line with that, there was no disclosure of information at each stage of the discussion of the IKN Law. Based on the applicant's investigation, of the 28 stages/ agendas of the IKN Bill discussion in the DPR, only seven of which documents and information can be accessed by the public.

"Representation of the people involved in the discussion of the IKN Bill is very partial and not holistic. Even though IKN is a joint embodiment of the Republic of Indonesia city which should be able to further expand participation and parties from various regions, groups, and elements of other community interests in the discussion," said the experts. applicant.

Referring to these matters, the applicant considers that the formation of the IKN Law does not meet the provisions for the formation of a law based on the 1945 Constitution and Law No. 12 of 2011.

Therefore, the Constitutional Court was asked to declare that the IKN Law was contrary to the 1945 Constitution.