Online ojek (motorcycle taxi drivers) around Palmerah Station in Jakarta on Wednesday (23/8). Several articles under Transportation Ministry Regulation No. 26/2017 on ride-hailing apps have been annulled by the Supreme Court.
JAKARTA, KOMPAS — The ruling of the Supreme Court (MA) that overruled 14 points of 72 articles in the Transportation Minister Regulation No. 26/2017 on Non-route Passenger Vehicle Management has disadvantaged all sides.
MA ruling No.37 P/HUM/2017 on the judicial review of Transportation Minister Regulation (Permenhub) No. 26/2017 was a setback for both sides of the case. Furthermore, consumers are left without any protection, as the state will have no presence in the ride-hailing apps business.
Indonesia Transportation Society expert council chairman Danang Parikesit said in Jakarta on Wednesday (23/8) that the articles submitted for judicial review related mainly to fare ceilings and floors, fleet size and an obligation for ride-hailing operators to be registered business entities.
“Such a condition leaves the public, or passengers, unprotected. If there is a dispute between the passenger and the driver, it will be a civil lawsuit and the government cannot intervene,” Danang said.
This would also be a problem for the driver, because without fare ceilings and floors, the operator could easily offer cheap, promotional fares. The absence of regulation about the size of fleets would have the same consequence: It will make the competition tougher and make it harder for drivers to find passengers.
Transportation Minister Budi Karya Sumadi said his office would study the ruling over the next three months.
Ministry spokesman Hengki Angkasawan said the public transportation sector should benefit the public. The government, he said, needed an instrument to oversee the business practices in the transportation industry to maintain nationwide balance and management.
Overruled
Earlier, the Supreme Court had ordered the Transportation Ministry to revoke Transportation Minister Regulation No. 26/2017 on Non-route Passenger VehicleManagement.
The instruction to revoke the regulation is stipulated in ruling No. 37/HUM/2017 on theMA judicial review of Permenhub No. 26/2017, issued on June 20. The MA ruling is in favor of plaintiffs Sutarno, Endru Valianto Nugroho, Lie Herman Susanto, Iswanto, Johanes Bayu Sarwo Aji and Antonius Handoyo, drivers of ride-hailing apps.
The plaintiffs, who filed their case on May 4, protested Permenhub No. 26/2017, which they thought did not promote healthy competition for transportation business players. As citizens or micro, small and medium business owners with their own vehicles, the plaintiffs considered that the Permenhub did not give them ease of business because the fare ceilings and floors must follow that set out by the government based on proposal from the governor.
The regulation on the fare ceilings and floors was considered contradictory to Law No. 22/2009 on Traffic and Land Transportation. Point (2), Article 183 of the law stipulates: “the fares of non-route transportation services are set as based on agreement between the passenger and the service provider”.
The plaintiffs protested 14 articles in the Permenhub, which they said hampered their business. The Permenhub articles state that the vehicles being used for ride-hailing services must bear a vehicle registration number issued in the transportation service’s area of operation, the vehicles must be owned by a business entity or a company, the ride-hailing service operator is not allowed to recruit drivers or to set fares, and all operational vehicles must have a registration certificate (SRUT).
In its consideration, the panel of judges led by Supreme Court justice for state administration Supandi and comprising Is Sudaryono and Hary Djatmiko, underlined four points, including that the app-based transportation service was a consequence of information technology development and that the existence of this special transportation service had changed the market from a monopoly to a free, competitive market.
MA spokesman Suhadi emphasized that the court was free from intervention in making the ruling.
Meanwhile, Grab public relations manager Dewi Nuraini said it was unable to comment on the MA ruling, which was echoed by Gojek spokesperson Rindu Ragilia.
