Ojek Driver's Role in Constitutional Court Ruling Against Expiring Internet Quota
The Constitutional Court (MK) has ruled that internet quota purchased by consumers must be usable until depleted and cannot be allowed to expire. An ojek online (ride-hailing) driver played a key role in this landmark decision.
The driver, Didi Supandi, together with his wife Wahyu Triana Sari, filed a judicial review against Article 71 point 2 of Law Number 6 of 2023 on Job Creation. The lawsuit, registered under number 273/PUU-XXIII/2025, challenged the system of quota expiry imposed by telecommunications providers when the validity period of a package ends.
During the hearing, Didi stated that the provision gave operators a blank cheque to implement quota expiry schemes without any obligation for accumulation (rollover) to consumers. He recounted losing 20 GB of data from a 30 GB package he had purchased. “I lost 20 gigabytes. For that data, you get 30 gigabytes for around 60 to 70 thousand rupiah, but I only used 10 gigabytes and the remaining 20 gigabytes were lost,” Didi said. He argued that the unilateral expiry of quota at the end of the active period violated the consumer’s property rights over the remaining internet data that had been fully paid for.
The court heard testimonies from operators, the government, the House of Representatives, and various other parties. While several similar lawsuits were dismissed during the process, the petition filed by Didi and his wife proceeded.
On Thursday, 23 July 2026, the MK partially granted the petition. The court declared that the existing norm in Article 28 paragraph (1) within Article 71 point 2 of the Job Creation Law did not provide guarantees for the property rights of telecommunications service users over the benefits of unused internet quota. The court stated that the real issue was not whether data constitutes a physical object, but whether consumers have a right to the economic benefits of services they have paid for.
The MK emphasised that the economic value paid by users must be protected so that the service benefits cannot be arbitrarily eliminated. The court provided six options to prevent purchased internet quota from expiring: a) accumulation or rollover of quota; b) extension of the active period; c) transfer of benefits; d) compensation; e) refund; or f) other forms of protection. The court stressed that no additional fees may be charged, and that unused quota must be protected as the property of the user until it is fully consumed without any extra costs under the pretext of extending the active period or for any other reason.