{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1580561,
        "msgid": "constitutional-court-rejects-smoking-while-driving-ban-challenge-cites-insufficient-evidence-1772431160",
        "date": "2026-03-02 11:37:00",
        "title": "Constitutional Court Rejects Smoking While Driving Ban Challenge, Cites Insufficient Evidence",
        "author": "Putri Yuliani",
        "source": "MEDIA_INDONESIA",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "Indonesia's Constitutional Court has rejected a petition challenging the traffic law provision requiring \"full concentration\" whilst driving, ruling the petition inadmissible due to the petitioner's failure to provide adequate evidence and absence from proceedings. The petitioner had sought to establish that the vague wording created a legal loophole permitting smoking while driving, arguing that explicit prohibition was necessary as smoking distracts drivers by requiring one hand off the wheel.",
        "content": "<p>The Constitutional Court (MK) has rejected a petition for judicial\nreview concerning the requirement of \u201cfull concentration\u201d under the\nTraffic and Road Transportation Law (UU LLAJ), which was claimed to\ncreate a loophole allowing smoking while driving.<\/p>\n<p>The petition was declared inadmissible because the petitioner failed\nto provide requisite evidence and did not appear at the hearing for\npetition correction.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cPetition 13\/PUU-XXIV\/2026 cannot be accepted,\u201d declared\nConstitutional Court Chief Suhartoyo during the reading of the decision\non Monday (2 March).<\/p>\n<p>In legal considerations presented by Constitutional Court Deputy\nChief Saldi Isra, the Court noted that throughout the preliminary\nexamination stage with an agenda for petition correction and evidence\nauthentication, the petitioner had not provided the required\ndocumentation. Additionally, the petitioner failed to attend the\ncorrection hearing chaired by the Court\u2019s Chief.<\/p>\n<p>The petition was filed by Syah Wardi, who challenged the\nconstitutionality of Article 106 paragraph (1), specifically the phrase\n\u201cfull concentration\u201d, as well as Article 283 of the Traffic Law. He\ncontended that this phrase was abstract and subject to multiple\ninterpretations, thereby potentially creating legal uncertainty.<\/p>\n<p>In his petition, Syah requested that the Constitutional Court declare\nArticle 106 paragraph (1) conditionally unconstitutional insofar as it\ndid not explicitly prohibit acts that endanger road users, including\nsmoking whilst operating a motor vehicle.<\/p>\n<p>According to Syah, the absence of an explicit smoking prohibition\nwhilst driving constitutes a normative gap. He argued that smoking\nactivity can impair concentration because drivers must remove one hand\nfrom the steering wheel and risk distraction from cigarette ash or\nembers.<\/p>\n<p>However, the Constitutional Court did not proceed to the substantive\nmerits of the petition. The dismissal decision was rendered solely on\nformal grounds\u2014that the petition did not meet procedural requirements,\nspecifically the failure to provide evidence and the petitioner\u2019s\nnon-appearance at the correction hearing.<\/p>\n<p>Consequently, the petition was declared inadmissible without further\nconsideration of the substance of the provision being challenged.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/constitutional-court-rejects-smoking-while-driving-ban-challenge-cites-insufficient-evidence-1772431160",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}