Many Police Officers Still Occupy Civil Service Posts, UU Polri Challenged Again in the Constitutional Court

Jakarta, Kompas.com - Lawyers Syamsul Jahidin, Ria Merryanti, who are civil servants (ASN), and lawyer Marina Ria Aritonang have submitted amendments to the material test request concerning the Explanation to Article 28(3) of Law Number 2 of 2002 on the Indonesian National Police (UU Polri) to the Constitutional Court (MK). The suit was filed because all three applicants still observe many civil posts occupied by active police officers. ‘Following the MK’s ruling in case 114/PUU-XXIII/2025, the continued occupancy of civil posts by active police officers remains high, due to widespread erroneous interpretations of the linked explanation, caused by statements from several constitutional law experts and the minister of law,’ said Syamsul during the hearing of case No. 61/PUU-XXIV/2026, Wednesday 4 March 2026. According to them, the explanation creates a legal anomaly and obscures the meaning of Article 28(3) of UU Polri which states ‘Members of the Indonesian National Police may hold positions outside policing after resigning or retiring from police service.’ The applicants argue that the provision in the Explanation to Article 28(3) UU Polri provides a loophole for active police officers to hold civil posts. This is deemed to be in conflict with Article 1(3), Article 28D(1), and Article 28D(3) of the 1945 Constitution (UUD 1945). The norm tested in the petition is said to substantively create a ‘dual function of the police’ because it acts as the state’s security and also has a role in government, bureaucracy, and social life. This is also considered to create structural discrimination against civilians, including the Applicants, and to open narrow spaces in civil governance. In their petition, the Applicants ask the MK to declare that the phrase in the Explanation to Article 28(3): ‘What is meant by ’outside the police’ positions are positions not connected with the police’ in UU Polri is contrary to the 1945 Constitution and has no binding legal effect, unless interpreted as: Explanation to Article 28(3): ‘CLEAR ENOUGH’. In other words, active police officers are prohibited from occupying civil posts that have no connection to the police. The Court held that the phrase ‘resigning or retiring from police service’ is a condition that must be satisfied for Polri members to hold civil posts. This formulation is an expressis verbis norm that does not require interpretation or other meaning. Moreover, the addition of the phrase ‘or not based on assignment from the Chief of Police’ has obscured the substance of the phrase ‘after resigning or retiring from police service’ in Article 28(3) of Law No. 2/2002. This results in legal uncertainty in filling posts for Polri members who may occupy civil posts outside the police; and at the same time creates legal uncertainty for civil servants (ASN) career paths outside the police institution.