TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsBREAKING: Constitutional Court rejects 5 petitions challenging TNI Law
In a single hearing on Wednesday, the Constitutional Court threw out five petitions for a judicial review of the TNI Law reivision passed in March, challenging the legislative process as rushed and lacking transparency.
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
A police officer patrols the grounds of the Constitutional Court in Central Jakarta on Feb. 4, 2025. (Antara/Bayu Pratama S.)
T
he Constitutional Court has rejected one legal challenge and dismissed four others filed by civic groups against the revised Indonesian Military (TNI) Law passed in March, which prompted widespread backlash over several contentious provisions.
During a hearing on Wednesday at the court in Central Jakarta, the judicial panel rejected a petition lodged by a coalition of human rights groups, including the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), Imparsial and the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras).
In their ruling, justices argued there was sufficient evidence showing the House of Representatives had promoted public participation and transparency during the drafting process in February.
Critics previously said the process was rushed, thereby excluding public consultation.
“Lawmakers made efforts to open up space for public participation in drafting the law revision,” Justice Guntur Hamzah read out during the hearing. He added that people could oversee the process on online platforms such as YouTube.
The court dismissed the plaintiff’s argument that the revision was rushed and the draft law was not publicly accessible, which covered the deliberations on March 14 and 15, when lawmakers discussed the bill behind closed doors at the Fairmont Jakarta hotel.
“During the said meeting, the head of the meeting noted that it was open to the public,” Guntur said.
Four of the court’s nine justices provided dissenting opinions in the ruling: Chief Justice Suhartoyo and justices Saldi Isra, Enny Nurbaningsih and Arsul Sani.
Read also: Govt, House staunch defense opens court battle on TNI Law
The Constitutional Court rejected a total of five petitions challenging the TNI Law revision in its ruling on Wednesday. All petitions highlighted the legislative process, contending that it was fast-tracked, lacked transparency and prevented public oversight.
Earlier during the same hearing, the court dismissed the four other petitions filed by law school students from the University of Indonesia, Gadjah Mada University and Padjadjaran University, ruling that the plaintiffs lacked the legal standing to challenge the law revision.
In contrast to five earlier petitions dismissed in June, Justice Enny said these four judicial review petitions were initially accepted because the justices wanted to verify the plaintiffs’ legal standing, which they deemed “unconvincing”.
“There is no evidence or facts in our examination that showed the plaintiffs had actively monitored the drafting of the TNI Law revision since the process began,” she said on Wednesday, while reading out the related ruling.
In their dissenting opinions, both the chief justice and Justice Saldi said the plaintiffs had a legitimate position to mount a legal challenge against the law revision.
The passage of TNI Law revision in March sparked several protests under the banner of Indonesia Gelap (Dark Indonesia) in several vities across the country before and after the House passed the bill.
