Jakarta, hitclubapk3 Indonesia
—
Chairman of the Indonesian Legal Aid and Human Rights Association (
PBHI
), Julius Hebrew believes that there are many errors in the interpretation of the Constitutional Court’s decision (
MK
) number 114/PUU-XXIII/2025.
Julius explained that the decision was related to the request for testing the phrase ‘or not with the assignment of the National Police Chief’ as stated in Article 28 paragraph (3) of the National Police Law Number 2 of 2002.
ADVERTISEMENT
SCROLL TO CONTINUE WITH CONTENT
“So the phrase assignment was deleted. In the debate, the phrase assignment or the assignment of the National Police Chief was considered disjunctive. It created ambiguity in the meaning of the first article and obscured the phrase that was related to post-resignation,” he told reporters, Friday (14/11).
“In short, being a member of the National Police can still hold a civil position. As long as it is still related to the main duties and functions of the National Police,” he added.
Therefore, Julius emphasized that the assignment of active members of the National Police, whether in ministries, institutions, agencies or directorates, remains valid as long as it is still included in the main duties and functions of the National Police as regulated by law.
Meanwhile, he said, the prohibition was aimed specifically at placing members of the National Police in fields that were not included in police duties, such as the religious field.
“So for example, for example, if he serves in the Indonesian Church Body, even if there is one, he has to resign because he has nothing to do with the main tasks and functions of the National Police,” he said.
“The National Police does not have a main function in the field of Christian religion. That must be interpreted. So it’s not like he was then fired from various institutions,” he added.
Julius added that the Constitutional Court’s decision then prohibited the National Police Chief from assigning members to positions that were not in line with the National Police’s main duties and functions.
“So it is not interpreted, for example, in Ministries or Institutions or Bodies such as BNN, BNPT, to mean that he must resign, he can no longer be a member of the National Police,” he explained.
The Constitutional Court granted the petition in case number: 114/PUU-XXIII/2025 which was petitioned by Syamsul Jahidin (student/advocate) and Christian Adrianus Sihite (student) who tested the constitutionality of the norms of Article 28 paragraph (3) and the Explanation of Article 28 paragraph (3) of Law 2/2002 concerning the Police (UU Polri).
Article 28 regulates that police officers may hold positions outside the National Police after resigning.Meanwhile, the explanation of Article 28 states that what is meant by a position outside the police is that it has nothing to do with the police or does not have an assignment as Chief of Police.
“Substantially, these two provisions emphasize one important thing, namely that members of the National Police can only hold positions outside the police after resigning or retiring from the police service,” said Constitutional Justice Ridwan Mansyur.
(fra/tfq/fra)
[Gambas:hitclubapk3 Video]
Read More: ‘Positive’test pack stabbed into watermelon, doctor confirms hoax
Read More: Branded a Chinese icon, the collapsed bridge is claimed to be able to withstand a M 8 earthquake
