Students Challenge "Public Order Disturbance" Phrase in Police Law at Constitutional Court

Students from UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung, Isma Maulana Ihsan and others, have submitted a material examination of Law No. 2 of 2002 on the Indonesian National Police (UU Polri) to the Constitutional Court (MK). In the petition numbered 155/PUU-XXIV/2026, the petitioners challenge the phrase “gangguan ketertiban” in Article 14 paragraph (1) letter i of the UU Polri, deeming it multi-interpretable and threatening citizens’ rights to express opinions. “The petitioners consider that the presence of the phrase ‘gangguan ketertiban’ in Article 14 paragraph 1 letter i and its explanation in Law No. 2 of 2002 on the Republic of Indonesia Police has the potential to harm the constitutional rights of the petitioners as affirmed in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia,” said Isma during the hearing at the MK building in Jakarta on Thursday (7/5/2026). Isma explained that as a student active in policy advocacy and actions to express opinions, his constitutional rights are potentially harmed by the existence of the phrase ‘gangguan ketertiban’ in that article. He assessed that the regulation does not provide clear boundaries regarding what actions can be categorised as disturbances to order. Meanwhile, the petitioners also argue that the phrase “gangguan ketertiban” in Article 15 paragraph 1 letter i of UU 2/2002 on the Republic of Indonesia Police is vague, multi-interpretable, and does not meet the principle of legal certainty that is just because it does not provide clear limits regarding what actions, conditions, or events can objectively be qualified as disturbances to order. “The absence of such boundaries has the potential to cause subjective and excessive interpretations by law enforcement officials, resulting in citizens’ activities that are constitutional rights, including expressing opinions in public and on social media, peaceful gatherings, conducting public discussions, or criticising government policies, being arbitrarily categorised as forms of disturbance to order,” he stated. In their petitum, the petitioners request that the MK declare the phrase “gangguan ketertiban” contrary to the 1945 UUD NRI and without binding legal force conditionally (conditionally unconstitutional). The petitioners hope that the MK will provide an interpretation that disturbances to order must be limited to actions that genuinely threaten state sovereignty, endanger lives or involve physical violence, damage property or seriously disrupt public facilities, and not used against citizens exercising their rights to assemble and express opinions peacefully in accordance with Article 28E paragraph (3) of the 1945 UUD.