Constitution Provides Mechanism for Revision of Laws
The government and the House of Representatives are currently discussing how to correct a number of typos contained in the recently signed Law No. 11/2020 on job creation.
By
RINI KUSTIASIH/DIAN DEWI PURNAMASARI
·3 minutes read
Kompas/Wawan H Prabowo
The DPR Plenary Meeting at the Parliament Complex, Senayan, Jakarta, Monday (5/10/2020). One of the agenda items is the approval of the Job Creation Bill.
The government and the House of Representatives are currently discussing how to correct a number of typos contained in the recently signed Law No. 11/2020 on job creation.
However, a mechanism to revise laws is actually already provided in the country’s Constitution. If the revision of the law is not carried out through a constitutional mechanism, it will create legal uncertainty and ultimately have the potential to add to the complexity of the problem.
House of Representatives Legislation Body (Baleg) chairman Supratman Andi Atgas said on Wednesday (4/11/2020) that in the following one or two days, the House and the government would find a way to correct the errors in the Job Creation Law, which were found in referred articles and clauses, such as in Article 6 of Chapter III, Article 175 of Chapter IX and clause 5 of Article 53.
“We acknowledge the errors. We [the House] and the government are currently discussing the right mechanism to correct them,” Supratman said.
One possible solution that emerged, according to Supratman, was the issuance of Distribution II of the Job Creation Law. Supratman said that the issuance of Distribution II had been part of an unwritten convention in the country’s law-making mechanism. “Will the government and the House issue that? It will be discussed later,” he said.
Previously, Baleg deputy chairman Willy Aditya of the NasDem Party said Distribution II had been used to correct an error contained in Law No. 13/2006 on witness and victim protection and Law No. 49/2008 on the establishment of Mesuji regency (Kompas, 3/11/2020).
AP PHOTO/BINSAR BAKKARA
Protesters hurl debris at police during a rally against a controversial bill on job creation in Medan, North Sumatra, Indonesia, Thursday, Oct. 8, 2020. Thousands of enraged students and workers staged rallies across Indonesia on Thursday in opposition to the new law they say will cripple labor rights and harm the environment.
Legal certainty
Former law and human rights minister Yusril Ihza Mahendra said that if the errors were mere typos that would not affect the implementation of the law, the government and House leaders could simply hold a meeting to correct the errors. The revised draft, Yusril added, would then be issued as an official reference.
Parahyangan Catholic University constitutional law expert Asep Warlan Yusuf, however, was of a different opinion. According to Asep, revising a passed and issued law would violate the principles and practices of good legislation.
“This is a threat for legal certainty and sets a bad precedent. If a similar situation occurs in the future, the government and the House can just easily revise the errors,” he said.
The issuance of Distribution II, according to Asep, would actually complicate the matter of the Job Creation Law as legal uncertainty would become more apparent. Public confusion would mount as to which draft was the correct one, given that two drafts would be circulating. Furthermore, if Distribution II were issued, it would amplify the faults of the legislative process for the Job Creation Law.
University of Jember Faculty of Law dean Bayu Dwi Anggono said a mechanism to correct laws was provided in the country’s Constitution. Bayu said the House or the government could file a proposal to revise the law and follow the established procedure. Another option, according to Bayu, was for the Constitutional Court to revise the law through a judicial review. Bayu added that the President could also issue a regulation in lieu of law (Perppu) to revoke the law.
