Photo illustration, Constitutional Court -

Constitutional Court rejects judicial review of Law on the establishment of West Irian autonomous province


Photo illustration, Constitutional Court –

Jayapura, Jubi – The Constitutional Court in Jakarta rejected a petition for a judicial review on Law No. 12/1969 to the 1945 Indonesian Constitution on Monday (1/6/2020) due to the non-legal status of the applicants.

The application for judicial review of Law No. 12/1969 on the establishment of West Irian Autonomous Province and autonomous regencies in West Irian Province was filed on 11 April 2019 by Zadrack Taime, Yan Pieter Yarangga, Paul Finsen Mayor, Sirzet Gwasgwas, Oktovianus Pekei, Albertus Moiwend, Yohanis Petrus Kamarka, Djanes Marambur, Yosepa Alomang, Karel Philemon Erari, Rev. Herman Awom, Thaha M Alhamid, Solidaritas Perempuan Papua (SPP/Papuan Women’s Solidarity), and the Synod of the Gospel Church (KINGMI) in the Land of Papua.

Reading out its ruling No.35/PUU-XVII/2019 in a hearing on Monday, the Constitutional Court stated the applicants have no legal status to submit the judicial review because they deemed to have no constitutional impairment. On this basis, the Constitutional Court rejected their petition.

The Constitutional Court stated that the impairment of constitutional right and/or authority should meet five conditions. First, the constitutional right and/or authority of applicants should granted by the 1945 Constitution. Second, their constitutional right and/or authority have impaired due to the statutory of the petitioned law.


“… It turns out that the petitioners substantially challenged the PEPERA (the Act of Free Choice) of 2 August 1969 that recognised by UN General Assembly Resolution No. 2504 (XXIV) of 19 November 1969. Therefore, there was no connection with the impairment of constitutional right [of the petitioners],” stated in the ruling of the panel of judges led by Anwar Usman.

As a member of the petitioners’ attorney team, advocate Yan Christian Warinussy stated that his clients already suspected that the Constitutional Court would reject their petition. “It showed from the Constitutional Court’s legal consideration saying that Pepera 1969 was an international affair which ratified in Law No. 12 of 1969,” said Warinussy.

Warinussy further stated that it was not reliable if the petitioners were deemed not to suffer any constitutional impairment due to the enactment of Law No. 12 of 1969. “The applicants suffered from a constitutional impairment by PEPERA legitimacy which stipulated into Law No.12 of 1969. [The statutory of the law] then has expanded the slogan of ‘the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia is undisputed’ which caused applicants to be treated unfairly in the context of freedom of association, assembly and opinion. That is why they submitted a request to the Constitutional Court,” said Warinussy.

Concerning the Constitutional Court’s decision, Warinussy further said he would promptly learn more about it. “We will meet the petitioners to provide legal explanations, as well as submit a mandate to them to take further legal steps after the verdict,” he said. (*)


Reporter: Angela Flassy

Editor: Aryo Wisanggeni G.

You might also like