Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami 
2026 Hak Cipta Milik Hukumonline.com
Produk Pilihan
Ada Pertanyaan? Hubungi Kami Marcell Sihombing, Agus Sahbani
The Constitutional Court has finally passed judgment on a judicial-review petition that sought to challenge the existence of the Financial Services Authority (OJK). The petition’s ultimate goal of dissolving the OJK has been categorically rejected by the Constitutional Court however, which has instead reaffirmed the existence of the OJK.The Constitutional Court argued that the establishment of the OJK was mandated by Article 34 (1) of the Bank Indonesia Law, as well as the implementing provision of Article 23D of the 1945 Constitution.
“The panel of judges has rejected the entire contents of the petition except for one part,” explained Constitutional Court Chief Justice, Arief Hidayat, as he read out the judges’ decision, which was registered as No. 25/PUU-XII/2014 at the Constitutional Court yesterday.
The wording of the Constitutional Court’s final decision, only erased the phrase “…and free from third-party intervention” from Article 1 (1) Law No. 21 of 2011 on the OJK (OJK Law). Article 1 (1) of the OJK Law now reads, “The financial Services Authority, hereinafter abbreviated as the OJK, is an independent institution with the purpose, task, and authority to regulate, supervise, assess, and investigate as stipulated under this Law.”
When the judicial-review petition was first submitted, the applicant argued that the word, “independent” under Article 1 (1) of the OJK Law contradicted the 1945 Constitution, because the word may only apply to Bank Indonesia as Indonesia’s central bank, and not to the OJK.
According to the Constitutional Court however, the inclusion of the word, “independent” does not make the establishment of the OJK unconstitutional, even though the matter is not specifically discussed in Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution. Rather, the establishment of the OJK is ultimately deemed to be of constitutional importance, just as the establishment of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the National Human Right Commission (Komnas HAM) were.
The Constitutional Court also added that the word, “independent” as stipulated under Article 23D of the 1945 Constitution had in this case been used in a similar way to that of the General Election Commission, as according to Article 22E (5) of the 1945 Constitution.
Justice Patrialis Akbar asserted that the OJK Law clearly affirmed the independence of the OJK and stated that the law was intended to ensure that the OJK’s policies and oversight were free from intervention. Therefore, the judges concluded, it is irrelevant to question the OJK’s legality and independence based on Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.
With regard to supervisory and regulatory authority over the financial sector—both macro-prudential and micro-prudential—which was previously held by Bank Indonesia, the Constitutional Court asserted that these functions are to be enforced by both institutions via an open legal-policy mechanism. According to the Constitutional Court, separating or merging authorities has nothing to do with unconstitutionality.
“Therefore, we find that the applicant’s challenge has no foundation according to Indonesian law,” explained Justice Anwar Usman during his reading of the judges’ decision.
Appreciation
Rahmat Waluyanto, the Deputy Chairman of the OJK’s Board of Commissioners, said that he appreciated the court’s decision to reaffirm the existence of the OJK.
“There is a constitutional importance and necessity to the establishment of the OJK. This is therefore a victory for the state and for the constitution,” Mr. Waluyanto declared after the trial.
According to Mr. Waluyanto, the Constitutional Court only sought to clarify the meaning of the OJK’s institutional independence in its ruling. The deletion of the phrase, “…and free from third-party intervention” does not affect the OJK’s ultimate authority, according to Waluyanto, as the word “independent” already encapsulates this autonomy.
Mr. Waluyanto also pledged that the OJK would seek to work harder while maintaining communication and cooperation with the government, BI, and the Indonesia Deposit Insurance Corporation.
(hot/ja/sp)
Marcell Sihombing, Agus Sahbani
The Constitutional Court has finally passed judgment on a judicial-review petition that sought to challenge the existence of the Financial Services Authority (OJK). The petition’s ultimate goal of dissolving the OJK has been categorically rejected by the Constitutional Court however, which has instead reaffirmed the existence of the OJK.The Constitutional Court argued that the establishment of the OJK was mandated by Article 34 (1) of the Bank Indonesia Law, as well as the implementing provision of Article 23D of the 1945 Constitution.
“The panel of judges has rejected the entire contents of the petition except for one part,” explained Constitutional Court Chief Justice, Arief Hidayat, as he read out the judges’ decision, which was registered as No. 25/PUU-XII/2014 at the Constitutional Court yesterday.
The wording of the Constitutional Court’s final decision, only erased the phrase “…and free from third-party intervention” from Article 1 (1) Law No. 21 of 2011 on the OJK (OJK Law). Article 1 (1) of the OJK Law now reads, “The financial Services Authority, hereinafter abbreviated as the OJK, is an independent institution with the purpose, task, and authority to regulate, supervise, assess, and investigate as stipulated under this Law.”
When the judicial-review petition was first submitted, the applicant argued that the word, “independent” under Article 1 (1) of the OJK Law contradicted the 1945 Constitution, because the word may only apply to Bank Indonesia as Indonesia’s central bank, and not to the OJK.
According to the Constitutional Court however, the inclusion of the word, “independent” does not make the establishment of the OJK unconstitutional, even though the matter is not specifically discussed in Indonesia’s 1945 Constitution. Rather, the establishment of the OJK is ultimately deemed to be of constitutional importance, just as the establishment of the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) and the National Human Right Commission (Komnas HAM) were.
The Constitutional Court also added that the word, “independent” as stipulated under Article 23D of the 1945 Constitution had in this case been used in a similar way to that of the General Election Commission, as according to Article 22E (5) of the 1945 Constitution.
Justice Patrialis Akbar asserted that the OJK Law clearly affirmed the independence of the OJK and stated that the law was intended to ensure that the OJK’s policies and oversight were free from intervention. Therefore, the judges concluded, it is irrelevant to question the OJK’s legality and independence based on Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution.
With regard to supervisory and regulatory authority over the financial sector—both macro-prudential and micro-prudential—which was previously held by Bank Indonesia, the Constitutional Court asserted that these functions are to be enforced by both institutions via an open legal-policy mechanism. According to the Constitutional Court, separating or merging authorities has nothing to do with unconstitutionality.
“Therefore, we find that the applicant’s challenge has no foundation according to Indonesian law,” explained Justice Anwar Usman during his reading of the judges’ decision.
Appreciation
Rahmat Waluyanto, the Deputy Chairman of the OJK’s Board of Commissioners, said that he appreciated the court’s decision to reaffirm the existence of the OJK.
“There is a constitutional importance and necessity to the establishment of the OJK. This is therefore a victory for the state and for the constitution,” Mr. Waluyanto declared after the trial.
According to Mr. Waluyanto, the Constitutional Court only sought to clarify the meaning of the OJK’s institutional independence in its ruling. The deletion of the phrase, “…and free from third-party intervention” does not affect the OJK’s ultimate authority, according to Waluyanto, as the word “independent” already encapsulates this autonomy.
Mr. Waluyanto also pledged that the OJK would seek to work harder while maintaining communication and cooperation with the government, BI, and the Indonesia Deposit Insurance Corporation.
(hot/ja/sp)