Petitioner Charlie Wijaya explaining the subject matter of the petition virtually at the preliminary hearing of Law No. 40 of 1999 on the Press, Tuesday (15/12/2020) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—After reporting comedian Bintang Emon to the Ministry of Communication and Informatics, Charlie Wijaya filed a material judicial review petition of Law No. 40 of 1999 on the Press because he felt his constitutional rights were harmed due to media headlines concerning himself. The preliminary hearing of case No. 104/PUU-XVIII/2020 took place on Tuesday, December 15, 2020. Petitioner Charlie Wijaya challenged Article 18 paragraph (1) of the Press Law.
Article 18 paragraph (1) of the Press Law reads, “Everyone who, against the law, deliberately take any action that causes hindrance or prevention of the criteria stated in Article 4 paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) shall be sentenced to 2 (two) years of imprisonment at the maximum or charged with a fine of Rp500,000,000 (five hundred million rupiahs) at the maximum.” Paragraph (2) reads, “A press company that violates the criteria as stipulated in Article 5 paragraph (1) and paragraph (2), and Article 13, shall be charged with a fine of Rp500,000,000 (five hundred million rupiahs) at the maximum.” Paragraph (3) reads, “A press company that violates the criteria as stipulated in Article 9 paragraph (2) and Article 12 shall be charged with a fine of Rp100,000,000 (one hundred million rupiahs).”
“The headlines have defamed me and destroyed my reputation, and they were inaccurate. I have reported to the police, who rejected my report on the grounds that [the headlines] were products of the press, so I was directed [to report] to the Press Council. After reporting to the Press Council, on September 2, 2020 I was I met with the press, who was [allegedly] guilty of violating Articles 1 and 3 of the Journalistic Code of Ethics because they presented inaccurate news, didn’t review the information, were not balanced, and presented judgmental opinions. As a result of the headlines, I have suffered immaterial losses. After that, the press acknowledged the mistake and apologized, and offered a response,” the Petitioner said to the panel chaired by Chief Justice Anwar Usman.
The Petitioner then asked for compensation for the defamation, insults, and threats that he received due to the erroneous reporting. However, it was denied on the grounds that there was no compensation under the Press Law. "If the press makes a mistake, [they] only apologize; [as] there are no tough sanctions, [they] will definitely repeat the [it]. My friends and I who have been victims of the news want equality before the law and justice. If this law continues [to apply], it will invalidate my constitutional right to receive compensation. Someone's reputation should not be toyed with carelessly,” he stressed.
Justices’ Advice
Chief Justice Anwar Usman recommended that the Petitioner revise the petition following the standard format available on the Court’s website for 14 work days. He also highlighted the petitum, in which the Petitioner alleged violations in the lawmaking procedure of the law. He explained that a petition for formal judicial review cannot be filed after 45 days since the promulgation of the law.
Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams asked the Petitioner to elaborate on his legal standing. “Are you an individual or a legal entity? You should mention that in the petition. Furthermore, you said you didn’t consult or weren’t counseled by anyone who are familiar with the Constitutional Court, be it an advocate, an attorney, or a legal counsel,” he said. He also asked the Petitioner to elaborate on his constitutional loss.
Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh asked the Petitioner to elaborate on the Constitutional Court’s authority. “First, [in relation to] the 1945 Constitution. Second, the Judicial Power Law. Third, the Constitutional Court Law, which has been amended three times, last with Law No. 7 of 2020. Then, the formal judicial review is usually related to the Law on the Formation of Laws and Regulations, which is Law No. 12 of 2011 as amended by Law No. 15 of 2019,” he explained.
Writer: Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
PR: Annisa Lestari
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 12/17/2020 20:43 WIB
Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian version, the Indonesian version will prevail.