{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1708722,
        "msgid": "boyamin-and-maki-challenge-international-agreements-law-at-constitutional-court-1777463587",
        "date": "2026-04-29 18:04:39",
        "title": "Boyamin and MAKI Challenge International Agreements Law at Constitutional Court",
        "author": "",
        "source": "CNN_ID",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "The Anti-Corruption Society (MAKI), led by Boyamin Saiman, along with other petitioners, has filed a constitutional challenge against Article 10 of Law No. 24\/2000 on International Agreements at the Constitutional Court, arguing it conflicts with the 1945 Constitution due to the lack of clear parameters for financial burdens and mandatory parliamentary approval timelines. The petition, triggered by delays in submitting the Gaza-Palestine Peace Agreement to the DPR, seeks to declare the article conditionally unconstitutional unless interpreted to require presidential submission within three months of signing. This case highlights concerns over executive overreach and the need for stricter checks on international treaties impacting national finances and sovereignty.",
        "content": "<p>The Anti-Corruption Society (MAKI), led by Boyamin Saiman, along with\nseveral petitioners, has challenged Law No.\u00a024\/2000 on International\nAgreements at the Constitutional Court (MK). In the inaugural hearing\nheld on Wednesday (29\/4), they requested a material examination of\nArticle 10 of the International Agreements Law against the 1945\nConstitution. Article 10 stipulates that international agreements must\nbe regulated through legislation. \u201cThis [petition for material\nexamination of the International Agreements Law] is triggered by the\nuncertainty regarding the continuation and the failure to submit to the\nDPR the Gaza Palestine Peace Agreement (Board of Peace - BoP) between\nPresident [of Indonesia] Prabowo [Subianto] and [US President] Donald\nTrump,\u201d Boyamin told CNNIndonesia.com via text message before the\npreliminary hearing. According to the MK website, the preliminary\nhearing for the petition was presided over by Constitutional Justice\nEnny Nurbaningsih, along with Constitutional Justices Ridwan Mansyur and\nArsul Sani. Dwi Nurdiansyah Santoso, the legal representative of the\npetitioners, stated that Article 10 of the International Agreements Law\ncontradicts the 1945 Constitution. Article 10 of the International\nAgreements Law states, \u201cThe ratification of international agreements\nshall be done by law if it concerns: a. political matters, peace,\ndefence, and state security; b. changes to territory or determination of\nstate boundaries of the Republic of Indonesia; c.\u00a0sovereignty or\nsovereign rights of the state; d.\u00a0human rights and the environment; e.\nthe establishment of new legal rules; f.\u00a0foreign loans and\/or grants.\u201d\nDwi explained that the existence of the aforementioned article is the\nroot of inefficiency due to the absence of definite parameters regarding\nthe nominal limits of \u201cstate financial burdens\u201d in every international\nagreement. According to the petitioners, the constitution actually\nrequires DPR approval for agreements that have broad impacts and burden\nthe state finances. Dwi elaborated, referring to the provisions of\nArticle 11 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, that the president in\nmaking other international agreements must obtain DPR approval. The\ncriteria are those that cause broad and fundamental consequences for the\npeople\u2019s lives related to state financial burdens, and\/or require\nchanges or the formation of laws. According to the petitioners, the\nabsence of a time limit for submitting approval to the DPR for\ninternational agreements is a form of legal smuggling and arbitrariness.\nFurthermore, he added, the recognition of the obligation to seek DPR\napproval becomes illusory and merely formalistic if the aforementioned\nlaw does not stipulate a definite time limit for the president. The\npetitioners assess that the absence of the phrase \u2018time limit\u2019 provides\na legal loophole for the executive to implement agreements de facto,\nwhile delaying indefinitely in submitting the agreement draft to\nparliament. Boyamin and colleagues then view this practice of indefinite\ndelays as a manifestation of executive tyranny and abuse of power, which\nis diametrically opposed to the rule of law principle enshrined in\nArticle 1 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. The petitioners also\nrequested that the MK declare Article 10 of Law No.\u00a024\/2000 on\nInternational Agreements constitutional with the addition of a\nthree-month time limitation phrase. \u201cTo declare Article 10 of Law\nNo.\u00a024\/2000 on International Agreements in the phrase \u2018The ratification\nof international agreements shall be done by law if it concerns: \u2026\u2019\ncontradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and has\nno binding legal force conditionally (conditionally unconstitutional),\ninsofar as it is not interpreted: \u2018no later than three (3) months from\nthe signing of the aforementioned agreement\u2019,\u201d said Dwi, reading the\npetitioners\u2019 petition as quoted from the MK website. Before closing the\nhearing, Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih stated that the\npetitioners were given 14 days to perfect their petition. Subsequently,\nthe MK will schedule the next hearing with the agenda of hearing the\nmain points of the petition\u2019s improvements.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/boyamin-and-maki-challenge-international-agreements-law-at-constitutional-court-1777463587",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}