UU Cipta Kerja Did not Fulfill the Phases to be Regulation

UU Cipta Kerja Did not Fulfill the Phases to be Regulation

InfoSAWIT, JAKARTA – Besides having issues in material aspects for many organizations, such as, the farmers, fishermen, teachers, and civil, who actively struggle for their constitutional rights, UU Cipta Kerja (UU CK) has no strong legal base to fulfill the conditions of phase to publish a regulation.

In the other words, UU CK is unconstitutional because it has no base to make the good and proper regulation (laws), such as, when discussing UU CK, the deviation may be seen that it did not take the openness and participation from every element of the people.

 The bad practice in making laws does not stop when Indonesian Legislators inaugurated it. After the inauguration, there were faults in formulating the regulation. This impacted to the substances of the chapters. The formal defects in UU CK make unfairness and uncertain law if it is implemented.

Many have refused UU CK, such as, the farmers, the planters, and the fishermen because they were not involved to arrange the regulation. As a matter of fact, the contents in the chapters have something to do and would systematically impact to their sectors and depend on their future. Responding this, Komite Pembela Hak Konstitusional (KEPAL) which consists of Serikat Petani Kelapa Sawit (SPKS), Serikat Petani Indonesia (SPI), Serikat Nelayan Indonesia (SNI), Yayasan Bina Desa, Sawit Watch (SW), Indonesian Human Rights Committee for Social Justice (IHCS), Koalisi Rakyat untuk Kedaulatan Pangan (KRKP), Indonesia for Global Justice (IGJ), Persaudaraan Perempuan Nelayan Indonesia (PPNI), Field Indonesia, Koalisi Rakyat untuk Hak Atas Air (KRuHA), Jaringan Pemantau Pendidikan Indonesia (JPPI), Aliansi Organis Indonesia (AOI), Jaringan Masyarakat Tani Indonesia (Jamtani), Federasi Serikat Pekerja Pertamina Bersatu (FSPPB) declared these,

The option to repeal UU CK should be done by two mechanisms, the first is, urge the president to publish Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang (Perppu); and the second, the plea to formal test and material examination of UU CK to the Constitutional Court.

The legal option has different consequence to put the civil society to monitor every process and defend their constitutional rights in making regulation.

Nowadays dynamic is that the option to publish Perppu still depends on the decision of president. The civil society is limited to play the role to offer the opinion. On the other hand, the constitution and regulation in Constitutional Court give the space to the citizens to sue and fight for their constitutional rights by proposing the formal test and material examination to Constitutional Court. The option is also about to anticipate not to publish Perppu by president. It is relevant and urgent to do formal test to UU CK knowing that there are only 45 days in maximal since UU CK is written and confirmed.

The urgent formal testing would not only about to repeal UU CK, but more than that, it is about to monitor the independency of Constitutional Court as the guard of constitution to do and execute a decision, defend the interpretation of Constitutional Court about the constitutional rights in many sentences of Constitutional Court which are final and binding.

UU CK does not really want to make “cipta kerja” for the farmers and the fishermen but it reorganizes the regulations about the farmers and fishermen without their participation. This would make bad impact to protect their rights, abandon the ideas of agrarian reformation, hostage the food sovereignty, weaken the sustainable plantation system, and education system nationally. These showed that UU CK is a discriminatory since it was planned, arranged, and discussed.

The legislation and enforcement of UUC if proven as defective formally would be the improper one by the country which highly prioritizes the law and constitution. If not, the malfunction of this case (process making of a regulation) would have precedence in the future and could be the chance to make wider deconstruction in the legal and regulation system nationally.

“Within the goal to defend the constitutional rights of the citizens of Indonesia, Komite Pembela Hak Konstitusional claimed to defend the constitutional rights which are injured by the publication process of UU CK by proposing formal test on Laws No. 11 / 2020 about Cipta Kerja to Constitutional Cour above other options through the regulation and legislation process,” KEPAL noted, as in the official statement to InfoSAWIT. (T2)


. . . to get our digital magazine can be read in a InfoSAWIT Store .