Why Did the MK Declare the Internet Quota Expiry Petition No. 87 Unclear?

In the ruling on case number 87/PUU-XXIV/2026 concerning the expiry of internet quotas, it was stated as unclear or obscure (obscuur). “The petitioner’s application is unclear or obscure (obscuur),” stated the ruling read out during the hearing on Tuesday (12/5/2026). For that reason, the MK declared that this petition could not be accepted. There are three points of reasoning why the MK considered this petition unclear. “In this case, the petitioner merely mentions Article 24C paragraph 1 of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and Article 10 paragraph 1 letter a as last amended by Law No. 7/2020 on the Constitutional Court,” the ruling states. Secondly, regarding the petitioner’s legal standing, it is explained that the petitioner only listed five points, namely constitutional rights, specific and actual losses, actual and potential, causal relationship, and restoration of losses. Thirdly, the petitioner did not adequately elaborate on the reasons for the contradiction between the article being tested and the constitution. The MK faced difficulties in assessing whether or not there was a contradiction in the norms requested by the petitioner. The lawsuit related to the ongoing expiry of internet quotas is still proceeding with numbers 33/PUU-XXIV/2026 and 273/PUU-XXIII/2025.