Berhenti Mengakali Konstitusi

Summary

This video script critiques Indonesia's controversial Omnibus Law (Cipta Kerja), emphasizing its unconstitutional aspects, particularly the lack of public involvement in its formation. It highlights a crucial ruling by the Constitutional Court (MK) in October 2024, which annulled and revised key articles of the law, marking a win for workers' rights. The script advocates for a new, inclusive labor law, urging the government to abandon outdated practices of bypassing public consultation. It calls for transparency, fairness, and adherence to constitutional principles in future legislation, ensuring the welfare of the public, especially workers.

Takeaways

• 😀 The Constitutional Court (MK) ruled in 2024 to repeal and revise 21 articles of the Omnibus Law (Cipta Kerja), marking a win for workers' rights in Indonesia.
• 😀 MK's decision emphasized the need for a new labor law, separate from the Omnibus Law, to better protect workers' rights and welfare.
• 😀 The revised law aims to address the issues of inconsistency and imbalance in Indonesia's labor regulations, with the goal of improving harmony in labor relations.
• 😀 The Omnibus Law's birth in 2020, and its replacement by a government regulation in lieu of law (Perpu), has faced criticism due to lack of public participation in the legislative process.
• 😀 The government bypassed MK's order to revise the law by issuing Perpu No. 2 of 2022, which was later adopted as the Omnibus Law of 2023, a controversial move.
• 😀 MK had previously ruled that the Omnibus Law of 2020 was conditionally unconstitutional and demanded a revision within two years, which was not properly followed by the government.
• 😀 Public participation in the legislative process was severely lacking, with MK criticizing the lack of transparency and the difficulty in accessing the draft law.
• 😀 The speaker stresses that no law should have a significant impact on the public, particularly workers, without proper involvement and transparency in the process.
• 😀 The public demands that the government adhere strictly to constitutional procedures in the creation of new laws, especially when they affect the welfare of the people.
• 😀 There is a call for the government to abandon old practices of creating laws through Perpu and to engage in a legitimate, inclusive legislative process that respects the constitution.

Q & A

What was the decision made by the Constitutional Court (MK) regarding the Omnibus Law in October 2024?

In October 2024, the Constitutional Court (MK) ruled to revoke and revise 21 articles of the Omnibus Law on Job Creation (Ciptaker). This decision was seen as a positive development for workers in Indonesia, as the court sided with the interests of the working class against business owners.

Why does the MK suggest that a new labor law should be created separately from the Omnibus Law?

The MK suggested that a new labor law should be created separate from the Omnibus Law to better protect the rights and welfare of workers. This new law would aim to address issues in the current labor law that were deemed problematic and unaligned with the public's interests.

What were the primary issues with the Omnibus Law on Job Creation that led to its rejection by the MK?

The Omnibus Law faced several issues, including its lack of transparency and the failure to involve the public in its creation. The MK found that the law did not meet the required standards of public participation and access to the draft legislation, which was deemed unconstitutional.

How did the government respond after the MK declared the previous version of the Omnibus Law unconstitutional in 2021?

In response to the MK's 2021 ruling that the Omnibus Law was constitutionally flawed, the government issued a Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perpu) No. 2 of 2022 to replace the previously rejected law. This was a controversial move since it was seen as an attempt to bypass the court's mandate for revision.

What role did public participation play in the decision of the MK regarding the Omnibus Law?

The MK emphasized the lack of public participation in the drafting of the Omnibus Law. The court ruled that the process did not sufficiently involve the public or relevant stakeholders, especially workers, which was a key factor in its decision to declare the law unconstitutional.

What was the main reason for the issuance of Perpu No. 2 of 2022 by the government?

The government issued Perpu No. 2 of 2022 as an urgent response to challenges such as the food, energy, financial, and climate crises, claiming that the law was necessary for Indonesia's economic recovery and to address these global challenges.

How did the MK react to the government's issuance of Perpu No. 2 of 2022?

The MK rejected the government's issuance of Perpu No. 2 of 2022, interpreting it as a tactic to bypass the court's order to revise the previous Omnibus Law in a transparent and public manner. The court emphasized that such shortcuts were unconstitutional.

What does the script suggest about the future legislative process for labor laws in Indonesia?

The script suggests that the future legislative process for labor laws in Indonesia must be more transparent and inclusive, ensuring that the public, especially workers, have a significant role in shaping the laws. It warns against repeating past practices of issuing Perpus to bypass public involvement.

Why is the public's involvement in the legislative process crucial according to the script?

The public's involvement is crucial to ensure that laws are not only legally sound but also reflective of the needs and rights of the people. The script stresses that laws, especially those affecting workers, must be created with transparency and broad participation to prevent exploitation and injustice.

What does the script indicate about the role of the Constitutional Court in protecting public rights?

The script indicates that the Constitutional Court has played a critical role in upholding public rights by ensuring that laws, particularly those affecting workers, align with constitutional principles and are created through a transparent and inclusive process. The court's decisions have been a safeguard against undemocratic practices.