Academics Call Constitutional Court Decisions On BPJS Requiring Bad Dreams For Retired State Civil Apparatus (ASN) And State Officials

Academics from Pakuan University Dr Andi Muhammad Asrun/ANTARA

JAKARTA - Academician from Pakuan University Andi Muhammad Asrun said the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) Number 72/PUU-XVII/2019 regarding the Social Security Administering Body (BPJS) has saved the fate of millions of people in the country. "This Constitutional Court decision eliminates bad dreams for retired state officials, retired civil servants, and civil servants in the future," he said in Jakarta, quoted from Antara, Tuesday, October 18. This was conveyed by Andi Asrun during a book review which he wrote entitled "Testing Constitutional Authority with Decision Annotation Number 72/PUU-XVII/2019: Continue the Old Age Savings Program and Pension Payment Program by PT Taspen (Persero)". The book, which he wrote for six months, is very useful for retired state officials, retired civil servants, including the fate of civil servants after retirement. Not only about the interests of the fate of retirees in old age, he said, the 514-page book concerns academic interests and can be a reference for learning for students, especially those who take lessons for the Constitutional Court law and constitutional law. Then, for legal practice, he said, the Constitutional Court's decision which had been rolling since two years ago was considered very important because it contained legal norms as conveyed by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court at that time. At that time, he said, the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court said that if there is a real loss due to the enactment of a law, then the Constitutional Court is obliged to state that the provisions in the law do not have binding legal force. He said Article 57 letter f and Article 65 Paragraph (2) of Law Number 24 Year 2011 concerning BPJS must be stopped because it is a nightmare for many people. The former Bloomberg and Kyodo journalists view the two articles tested on the Constitutional Court as inviting anxiety for Taspen participants. This means that their future will be unclear if the two articles are enforced. For example, said Andi, a retired Deputy Chief Justice of the Supreme Court who should receive a pension of IDR 5 million every month only received around IDR 2 million with a transfer to BPJS. Not only that, he said, retirees no longer receive pensions for widows, pensions for widowers, and pulnadua, including the allowances for wives that have been lost due to the enactment of the two articles. Through the book he wrote, Andi wanted to convey that there was a constitutional violation of a statutory regulation and it must be straightened out by the Constitutional Court. "So, if there is a constitutional violation of the enactment of a statutory regulation, it must be straightened out immediately," he said. He emphasized that the Constitutional Court must have no doubts about upholding the constitutionality of citizens. This is because the Constitutional Court is designed by the maker of constitutional amendments to enforce the constitution itself. "The Constitutional Court's decision shows firmness," he said. During his career in the legal world, Andi assessed that the Constitutional Court's decision Number 72/PUU-XVII/2019 was an old decision, namely two years or from 2019 until it was decided in 2021.