Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Agus Sahbani, Andin Aditya Rahman
Nine PT. Pertamina employees – Otto Geo Diwara Purba, Syamsul Bahri Hasibuan, Eiman, Robby Prijatmodjo, Macky Ricky Avianto, Yuli Santoso, Joni Nazarudin, Piere J. Wauran, and Maison Des Arnoldi –have filed a judicial review application with the Constitutional Court regarding Article 95 (4) of Law No. 13 of 2013 on Labor in their capacity as members of the All Indonesia Pertamina Workers Union (Serikat Pekerja Pertamina Seluruh Indonesia) .
Article 94(5) states that, “In the event that a company is declared bankrupt or is liquidated based on prevailing laws and regulations, wages and other rights of workers and laborers shall be prioritized debt payments.”
The applicants argue that they could potentially suffer losses under this article, as it does not provide a clear interpretation of the meaning of “prioritized debt payments”.
“This provision causes legal uncertainty due to the lack of stringent interpretation,” stated the applicants’ attorney, Janses E. Sihaloho, during the initial examination proceedings at the Constitutional Court in Jakarta on Tuesday.
The framework for the settlement of debts of bankrupt companies based on Law No. 6 of 1983 on General Provisions and Procedures of Taxation, as last amended by Law No. 28 of 2007, provides a hierarchy for settling creditors’ debts in bankruptcies. The rights of workers and laborers are prioritized followed by the rights of the state, auction offices and governmental institutions.
According to Sihaloho, the words “prioritized debt payments” create ambiguity with respect to the meaning of the article, which positions workers and laborers in a weak bargaining position against other creditors when a company is declared bankrupt..
In response to the judicial review filed by the applicants, Ahmad Sodiki, Chief Judge on the panel adjudicating this case, required the applicants to first read Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU/2008.
“Please read that Constitutional Court Decision, because it includes deliberation on Article 95. Maybe there are considerations that you can use as material for the judicial review,” Sodiki suggested.
Harjono, a judge on the panel, inquired as to the applicants’ legal standing to file the judicial review, as not all individuals and legal entities have the necessary legal standing required to file a judicial review.
“Not all individuals possess legal standing because there are criteria. Look at the criteria, and find out whether or not you satisfy it,” stated Harjono.
Anwar Usman, another judge on the panel, raised the issue of the constitutional norms applicable to applicants’request for a judicial review in thatthe applicants’ arguments are based on laws and regulations other than the 1945 Constitution.
“Focus on the norms being in conflict with the 1945 Constitution,” he suggested.
(hot/kc)
Agus Sahbani, Andin Aditya Rahman
Nine PT. Pertamina employees – Otto Geo Diwara Purba, Syamsul Bahri Hasibuan, Eiman, Robby Prijatmodjo, Macky Ricky Avianto, Yuli Santoso, Joni Nazarudin, Piere J. Wauran, and Maison Des Arnoldi –have filed a judicial review application with the Constitutional Court regarding Article 95 (4) of Law No. 13 of 2013 on Labor in their capacity as members of the All Indonesia Pertamina Workers Union (Serikat Pekerja Pertamina Seluruh Indonesia) .
Article 94(5) states that, “In the event that a company is declared bankrupt or is liquidated based on prevailing laws and regulations, wages and other rights of workers and laborers shall be prioritized debt payments.”
The applicants argue that they could potentially suffer losses under this article, as it does not provide a clear interpretation of the meaning of “prioritized debt payments”.
“This provision causes legal uncertainty due to the lack of stringent interpretation,” stated the applicants’ attorney, Janses E. Sihaloho, during the initial examination proceedings at the Constitutional Court in Jakarta on Tuesday.
The framework for the settlement of debts of bankrupt companies based on Law No. 6 of 1983 on General Provisions and Procedures of Taxation, as last amended by Law No. 28 of 2007, provides a hierarchy for settling creditors’ debts in bankruptcies. The rights of workers and laborers are prioritized followed by the rights of the state, auction offices and governmental institutions.
According to Sihaloho, the words “prioritized debt payments” create ambiguity with respect to the meaning of the article, which positions workers and laborers in a weak bargaining position against other creditors when a company is declared bankrupt..
In response to the judicial review filed by the applicants, Ahmad Sodiki, Chief Judge on the panel adjudicating this case, required the applicants to first read Constitutional Court Decision No. 18/PUU/2008.
“Please read that Constitutional Court Decision, because it includes deliberation on Article 95. Maybe there are considerations that you can use as material for the judicial review,” Sodiki suggested.
Harjono, a judge on the panel, inquired as to the applicants’ legal standing to file the judicial review, as not all individuals and legal entities have the necessary legal standing required to file a judicial review.
“Not all individuals possess legal standing because there are criteria. Look at the criteria, and find out whether or not you satisfy it,” stated Harjono.
Anwar Usman, another judge on the panel, raised the issue of the constitutional norms applicable to applicants’request for a judicial review in thatthe applicants’ arguments are based on laws and regulations other than the 1945 Constitution.
“Focus on the norms being in conflict with the 1945 Constitution,” he suggested.
(hot/kc)