The Constitutional Court Asks The Government-DPR To Prove The Form Of Public Participation In The TNI Law

BETWEEN PHOTOS/Bayu Pratama S/YU

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court asked the government and the DPR to provide concrete evidence regarding the form of public participation in the formation of Law Number 3 of 2025 concerning Amendments to Law Number 34 of 2004 concerning the Indonesian National Army (TNI Law).

Deputy Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Saldi Israpadasi, in the follow-up examination of the formal test of the TNI Law, said that in formal testing, evidence and facts at the stage of drafting a law would be one of the determinants of the Court's decision later.

"Because this is not a matter of expertise in this formal testing case, but more about evidence and facts. Therefore, what must be presented to us is actually evidence so that we can see if the point is there or not, the things that were told earlier," said Saldi after listening to the statement. government and DPR reported by ANTARA, Monday, June 23.

According to him, evidence regarding public participation in the formation of laws needs to be concretely proven because this principle must be carried out at every stage, starting from planning, discussion, to approval.

"Please later we will be given an explanation and evidence of what form of participation is carried out in the three important stages," said Saldi.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih said both the government and the DPR needed to include documents that could support community involvement in the formation of the TNI Law.

"If then there is a community group that gives a response, we also ask that there be clarity on the documents, who are the people, what are the proposals, who are there, what are the responses from the legislators?" said Enny.

Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat also said the same thing, that formal testing is a fast trial category because based on procedural law, each case must be decided within 60 days.

"Therefore, I ask from the DPR and the Government after this statement, all evidence in the form of letters, writings, documents, photos of activities can be an attachment of evidence that can convince the Court to conclude that in the preparation of this law it is really carried out," he said.

Responding to this, the Chairman of Commission I of the DPR, Utut Adianto, as the parliamentary representative, said that his party would answer in writing the judges' requests.

"We will answer in writing everything, so that there are no technical errors," he said.

Minister of Law Supratman Andi Agtas as government representative also conveyed the same commitment.

"Later we will convey it in writing," said Supratman at the end of the trial.

As for this follow-up session, the government and the DPR conveyed information which basically stated that the TNI Law did not conflict with the constitution because its drafting was in accordance with statutory regulations, especially regarding public involvement and the principle of openness.