T

he Constitutional Court (MK) has ruled that the marriage ban between co-workers is unconstitutional. However, opinions remain deeply divided.

For 33-year-old Widi Astuti Arie, who lives in Jakarta and works for the government, the ban might have had its own reasons for existing. But at the same time, it had also violated civil liberties, Widi said, recalling her experience in 2011.

At that time, she had to resign from her job at a state-owned bank because she was going to marry a colleague.

“When I was hired, [the company] told me there was [an internal company] regulation that forbade colleagues from marrying each other,” she said on Friday. “I was OK with that; but who knew I would fall in love with someone I met at work?”

Widi met her future husband at work and they started dating, before eventually planning to get married.

However, after realizing that one of them had to leave their job, they started to look for other opportunities. Widi later decided to resign, as she had found another a job as a civil servant, a job which she continues to do to this day.

Widi applauded the MK ruling, saying it would ensure the rights of workers to get married and keep their jobs at the same time.

A similar sentiment came from 28-year-old North Jakarta resident Danisa. Earlier this year, she and her husband had to decide who would resign, as the digital start-up company they worked for had an internal regulation enforcing the ban.

“A few weeks before the wedding, they told us that one of us needed to resign,” Danisa said, adding that marriage should not be a reason for someone to lose their job.

Widi and Danisa are only a few examples of those who had no choice but to leave their jobs if they wanted to tie the knot with someone they worked with.

Some, however, say the ban is necessary to prevent married couples from conspiring to commit foul play at the workplace or from abusing power.

“In some cases, like in a bank, maybe it’s necessary after all,” said Mutia Wisnu Wardani, 27, who resigned from a bank in 2014 upon marrying her co-worker.

She noticed that in her company there were about eight couples, among which one individual had to resign to get married.

Tammi Sakinah, a 24-year-old public relations officer who resigned from a media company in Jakarta earlier this year in order to marry her co-worker, echoed Mutia’s concerns.

“If the ban is no longer enforced, then what tool could ensure the company that the marriage was not done as a maneuver to commit misconduct in the office?” she said.

However, she appreciated the MK ruling, saying it could be good for workers since they no longer needed to worry about looking for another job.

Confederation of Indonesian Workers Unions (KSPI) chairman Said Iqbal said the MK ruling was good news for workers.

“The ruling is in line with the International Labor Organization [ILO] convention’s principle that ensures there would be no discrimination for workers,” he said. “Forcing a worker to resign just because they want to marry a co-worker is form of a discrimination.”

He said marriage should not be a reason to ask someone to resign. “The benchmarks should be professionalism, efficiency and productivity instead; not feelings.”

Indonesian Employers Association (Apindo) chairman Hariyadi Sukamdani said the ban should not be seen as a form of discrimination.

“It was established to prevent conflicts of interest between co-workers who have personal relationships,” he said. “It’s all about good corporate governance.”

Hariyadi also regretted that the MK did not ask Apindo, the representative of employers, to present its arguments in the judicial review case.

As the case has been settled at MK, Apindo said it would comply with the ruling and instead would now enforce tighter supervision of such married couples to prevent misconduct. (nmn)