MK believes that the entire process of establishing the Job Creation Law does not violate the Constitution
By : Clara Diah Wulandari )*
The Constitutional Court (MK) considered that the entire process of forming the Job Creation Law did not in any way oppose any provisions in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. In fact, the existence of these regulations was able to continue to maintain the stability of the national economy.
There are 5 (five) requests for formal review of Law (UU) Number 6 of 2023 concerning Stipulation of Regulations in Lieu of Law (Perppu) Number 2 of 2022 concerning Job Creation which is now a Law (UU Job Creation), all of them rejected by the Constitutional Court.
In the legal consideration of Case Number 54/PUU-XXI/2023 which was read by the Constitutional Justice, M. Guntur Hamzah, it was stated that the applicant argued that Perppu Number 2 of 2022 was the forerunner to the birth of the Job Creation Law which had been stipulated by the President of the Republic of Indonesia ( RI) by violating the Constitutional Court (MK) decision regarding meaningful participation.
Then very firmly, regarding the arguments put forward by the applicant, the Constitutional Court itself is of the opinion that based on the legal framework for the formation of laws originating from Perppu, a Perppu that has been stipulated by a President must obtain approval from the parliament, namely the Council. Representatives of the People of the Republic of Indonesia (DPR RI) so that they continue to have the power to apply as law.
In the explanation of Article 5 letter g of Law 12 of 2011, the meaning of the principle of openness has been determined, namely that in the formation of a legal regulation starting from the planning, drafting, discussion, ratification or stipulation stage until promulgation it is of course transparent and open.
So, because it is clearly stated, all levels and elements of society have a very broad opportunity to provide input in the formation of statutory regulations. Moreover, there is an aspect of urgency that forces conditions in the issuance of a Perppu, causing the process of forming laws originating from a Perppu to have limited time. So rationally, there is a need to differentiate between laws originating from Perppu and ordinary laws, including in implementing the principle of meaningful participation.
Therefore, the process of approving the bill to establish the Perppu as the Job Creation Law in the DPR RI is completely irrelevant in involving the principle of meaningful community participation because of the compelling nature of the urgency and time limitations. So, with the approval that has been given by the DPR RI, it is the same as carrying out their supervisory function, in fact it is part or representation of the will of the people.
Apart from that, the DPR RI itself has also been given the obligation to continue to provide all information to the public so that all elements of society can directly access and provide input, such as through the information system application on their official website.
The decision to reject the five cases challenging the Job Creation Law was decided directly at a decision or decree pronouncement hearing at the Indonesian Constitutional Court Building, Jakarta by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Anwar Usman. He firmly said that the Constitutional Court had tried and rejected the petition from the applicants in its entirety.
In fact, in the conclusions presented, the Constitutional Court considered that the petitions submitted by the applicants in the five cases were completely without legal grounds. From the various considerations that have been carried out, the court is of the opinion that the formal formation of Law Number 6 of 2023 does not conflict at all with the constitution or the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, so that the implementation of the Job Creation Law still has binding legal force.
The Constitutional Court did not find any violations of various principles in the ratification of the Job Creation Law as demanded by the workers. The Job Creation Law does not violate the principle of popular sovereignty at all, nor does it violate the guarantee of legal certainty and does not violate the constitution.
On the contrary, the ratification of the Job Creation Law is a manifestation of the full implementation of people’s sovereignty, while also providing legal certainty in a democratic country.
With the changes to Law Number 11 of 2020 through Law Number 6 of 2023 concerning Job Creation (UU Ciptaker), this was done to be able to harmonize existing laws and regulations. Not only that, but these changes are also able to answer all current legal needs in an effort to continue to maintain the stability of the current national economy, so there is a dire need for a clear legal umbrella as the basis for policy making by the Indonesian Government.
In no way does it violate any provisions in the constitution or the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The entire process and stages from the formation to the ratification of the Job Creation Law were actually assessed by the Constitutional Court as good and formally appropriate.
)* The author is a contributor to Ruang Baca Nusantara