Golkar Urges Revision of Former Officials' Pension Law to be Discussed in Parliamentary Special Committee
Golkar party chairman Zulfikar Arse responded to a Constitutional Court (MK) decision that partly granted a legal challenge against Law No. 12 of 1980 concerning pensions for former state officials. Arse argued that the law indeed requires revision and must be updated to reflect modern developments.
“That is what should also be evaluated by the MK decision. We’ll see what happens next. In my opinion, from a temporal perspective, the law also needs revision because it is too old. It should probably be adjusted to modern developments, aligned with public aspirations, and ensure that the finances, protocols, and administration of state officials are more proportionate,” said Arse at Golkar’s headquarters in West Jakarta on Tuesday (17 March 2026).
Arse believed that discussions on a new law concerning former officials’ pensions would be better conducted through a special parliamentary committee (Pansus) of the House of Representatives. The rationale was to ensure input was gathered across various parliamentary bodies and supporting organs.
“Where would it be most appropriate for this law? Perhaps in Commissions XI and II. A special committee would be better if possible,” said Arse, adding that “we would be able to hear more aspirations from the members of parliament themselves.”
The Constitutional Court partly granted a legal challenge concerning pensions for former state officials, ordering lawmakers to amend Law No. 12 of 1980 on the Financial and Administrative Rights of Leaders and Members of the Highest/High State Institutions as well as Former Leaders of the Highest/High State Institutions and Former Members of High State Institutions.
The court decision (case number 191/PUU-XXIII/2025), filed by Ahmad Sadzali and others, was delivered during a hearing at the Constitutional Court building in Central Jakarta and broadcast live on the court’s YouTube channel on Monday (16 March 2026). In the petition, the plaintiffs challenged Article 12 paragraphs (1) and (2), as well as Articles 16 paragraph (1) a, 17 paragraph (1), 18 paragraph (1) a, and 19 paragraphs (1) and (2) of Law 12/1980.
In its decision, the Constitutional Court stated that Law 12/1980 no longer complies with current conditions. The court determined that Law 12/1980 has lost relevance for continued enforcement.
“Accordingly, Law 12/1980 must be declared to contradict the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and shall have no binding legal force,” the court ruled.
The Constitutional Court stated that lawmakers must formulate new legislation to regulate the pension issue. The court gave lawmakers a two-year deadline to do so.