Former MK Chief Justices Oppose Jokowi's Job Creation Perppu

TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - A number of former Constitutional Court (MK) judges voted unanimously against the actions of President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo who issued the regulation in lieu of law on Job Creation (Perppu Cipta Kerja). They consider President's move a bad precedent to the point that it violates the principles upheld in the rule of law.

As a matter of context, the Constitutional Court ruled that Law No. 11/2020 concerning Job Creation was formally flawed on November 25, 2021. The Court stated that the Job Creation Law was conditionally unconstitutional and ordered the government to correct it within the next two years.

Instead of fixing the court-decided flawed law, the President issued instead the regulation in lieu of law on December 30th last year under the pretense that the threat of an economic crisis has forced the Perppu issuance. 

Jimly Asshiddiqie

The former constitutional court chief justice from 2003-2008 argues that the government should not have had major issues following up the initial MK court ruling as the deadline is still 7 months ahead on November 2023. 

The government, Jimly elaborated, would only have to formulate a new law within this time frame and fix the substance of the law that had garnered public criticism and open meaningful and substantial public participation, as the court had ordered. 

"There is no need to build an argument that there is a forced urgency that was made up by issuing a Perppu in the gloom of new year's eve which shocked everyone," said Jimly in a statement on January 4.

Hamdan Zoelva

The fourth constitutional court chief justice from 2013-2015 also criticized the issuance of the Job Creation Perppu. One of the aspects Hamdan laments is the reason used by President Jokowi. 

Hamdan said that the Constitutional Court Decision No. 138/PUU7/2009 had actually provided clear limits for a president to be able to issue a Perppu.

But in the end, Hamdan acknowledged that there is still room for Jokowi as the head of state to interpret the urgency that compels according to the limitations in the Constitutional Court's decision. 

"Yes, in the end, it will be like that," Hamdan told Tempo, Saturday, December 31.

Hamdan understands the threat of an economic crisis excuse the President used. He also considered that threats and legal certainty could not be contested, because overcoming the crisis must have been in the interest of the public.

Maruarar Siahaan

The former MK chief justice during the 2003-2008 period explains that the constitutional court decision regarding the Job Creation Law is a verdict that answers a formal test application. 

"Regarding the procedures for forming laws that do not give enough opportunity to accommodate the aspirations of the people as the holders of sovereignty in forming laws," he told Tempo.

He believes the correct answer for lawmakers was to improve the law by accommodating people's aspirations for adoption of the Job Creation Law, however, President Jokowi chose to directly issue the regulation in lieu of law.

For Maruarar, the formation of a Perppu may met the legal requirements amid a pressing emergency referred to in the 1945 Constitution Article 22. However, this remains problematic, as the Perppu on Job Creation does not answer the question of the formal test that was granted by the Constitutional Court.

FAJAR PEBRIANTO

Click here to get the latest news updates from Tempo on Google News