The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected a petition submitted by\nRachmad Rofik regarding expired internet quotas. The lawsuit was\ndismissed because Rachmad failed to properly stamp the evidence\ndocuments.<\/p>\n
Decision No.\u00a030\/PUU-XXIV\/2026 was read during a hearing held at the\nMK Building in Central Jakarta on Monday, 2 March 2026. The petitioner\nchallenged Article 71 paragraph 2 of Law No.\u00a06 of 2023 concerning the\nEnactment of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No.\u00a02 of 2022 on Job\nCreation into Law (Job Creation Law).<\/p>\n
The court found that the petitioner did not submit the petition with\ncomplete evidence documents through the preliminary examination hearing,\nwhich was scheduled to review the petition amendments and validate the\nevidence. Based on these facts, the MK stated that the petition did not\nmeet the formal requirements for submission.<\/p>\n
\u201cHaving examined the evidence submitted by the petitioner, which\ncomprises evidence items P-1 through P-7, the Court has found that the\npetitioner\u2019s evidence does not bear sufficient official stamps as valid\nevidence as required under Article 12 paragraph (3) of Ministry of\nFinance Regulation 7\/2025, which states that online submission of\npetitions must be accompanied by submission of evidence documents in one\ncopy bearing official stamps as prescribed by applicable legislation,\u201d\nstated the MK.<\/p>\n
\u201cWe declare Petition No.\u00a030\/PUU-XXIV\/2026 inadmissible,\u201d announced MK\nChief Suhartoyo in pronouncing the judgment.<\/p>\n
Rachmad Rofik\u2019s Lawsuit<\/p>\n
During the preliminary examination hearing, the petitioner explained\nthat he had purchased an internet quota in full. He later received a\nsystem notification that the 10 GB quota would expire on 4 January\n2026.<\/p>\n
The petitioner argued that the internet quota he had fully purchased\nconstituted personal property with economic value. Due to the operation\nof this article, the petitioner contended that operators could seize\nthis property right through a unilateral \u201cexpiry\u201d scheme without any\ncompensation.<\/p>\n
The petitioner believed this violated the principle of property\nprotection that should not be arbitrarily taken. According to the\npetitioner, there was significant legal uncertainty compared with other\nenergy sectors.<\/p>\n
Therefore, the petitioner requested that the MK declare Article 71\nparagraph 2 of the Job Creation Law to be in conflict with the 1945\nConstitution and to have no binding legal force insofar as it is not\ninterpreted to:<\/p>\n
\u2014 Require that tariff setting and telecommunications service delivery\nschemes guarantee the accumulation of remaining data quota (data\nrollover) that consumers have purchased<\/p>\n
\u2014 Ensure that remaining data quotas purchased by consumers remain\nvalid and can be used as long as the prepaid card is active<\/p>\n
\u2014 Require that unused data quotas be converted back to credit value\nor refunded proportionally to consumers when the package validity period\nexpires<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/evidence-not-stamped-constitutional-court-rejects-internet-quota-expiry-lawsuit-1772442078", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }