top of page
Search

Examining the Legal Politics of the Establishment of The omnibus bill on job creation in Indonesia


The Government of Republic Indonesia and the People's Representative Council of the Republic of Indonesia (DPR RI) declared the Omnibus Bill on Job Creation by obtaining joint approval in a plenary meeting on October 5, 2020. The majority vote at the parliamentary level supported the passage of the draft of the Omnibus Bill on job creation to a Bill. However, there are several things that need to be criticized by the legal politics of the formation of the omnibus bill on job creation. The first thing is the formation of this omnibus bill on job creation. The application of the omnibus law method is something new to be applied in the politics of the formation of laws and regulations in Indonesia. This is because the omnibus law method is a practice of forming laws and regulations used by countries that adhere to the common law legal system. Whereas in practice the formation of Indonesian laws and regulations, which is generally used, refers to the politics of law formation adhered to by countries that adhere to the civil law legal system.


This is in line with the enactment of Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning Establishment of Laws and Regulations which serve as guidelines for legislators in Indonesia in planning, discussing and ratifying a statutory law. Referring to Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning the Establishment of Laws and Regulations, the omnibus law method is in no way described as being used as a method of forming legislation in Indonesia.


The application of the omnibus law method in the politics of the formation of the omnibus bill on job creation is basically not contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. However, what needs to be understood is that by applying the omnibus law method in politics the formation of the omnibus bill on job creation will become the beginning of the formation of other laws and regulations using the omnibus law method. The application of the omnibus law method increasingly shows that there has been inconsistency in the politics of law formation in Indonesia or at least there has been a change in the direction of legal politics in the formation of laws and regulations in Indonesia.


In addition, if the omnibus law method understands its characteristics, it is not appropriate to be used in legal politics for the formation of legislation in Indonesia. There are at least two things that cause the omnibus law method to be incompatible with the characteristics of the laws and regulations in Indonesia.


The first thing is that the omnibus law method allows it to contain regulations from the same level of legislation which are subject to different subjects but have a relationship to be carried out in a statutory regulation using the omnibus law method. This will indirectly create problems where there are contradictions in the regulation of articles in the laws and regulations that use the omnibus law method. Where if it refers to the principle of accuracy in shaping laws and regulations, this accuracy will be more achievable if it uses a simple method of forming laws and regulations as regulated in the provisions of Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning Establishment of Laws and Regulations.


The second thing is that the omnibus law method in the formation of the omnibus bill on job creation in Indonesia indirectly illustrates that the formation of legislation using the omnibus law method does not discuss the substance of a statutory law comprehensively. Where if the purpose of the formation of statutory regulations using the omnibus law method is to make efficiency and harmonization of statutory regulations in a short time. However, the two objectives of forming legislation using the omnibus method are not reflected in the formation of the omnibus bill on job creation in Indonesia. Where it is to be further examined in the discussion of the omnibus bill on job creation does not reflect the consistency of the law as described in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.


After criticizing the omnibus law method used in the legal politics of the creation of the omnibus bill on job creation, things that need to be criticized are also regarding the validity of the omnibus bill on job creation from a sociological perspective must also be critiqued. The omnibus bill on job creation contains 11 clusters in it that do not represent the will of the people in general. One of the clusters that the community highlights the most is the employment cluster. This employment cluster is full of the interests of the general public, especially those included as the labour group. The arrangement of the labour cluster, which should consider the protection aspect of the workers, is not considered comprehensively.


This has been voiced from various circles and not only from the working class. Various groups such as academicians to practitioners also expressed their disagreement with the substance of the omnibus bill on job creation. The disagreement was even reflected in the demonstration against the substance of the omnibus bill on job creation in various regions in Indonesia. This shows that in one cluster of the omnibus bill on job creation, namely the employment cluster, does not provide sociological attachment with the public. Even in clusters regulating the environment, the practice is not very different in the formulation of substance in the labour cluster where the tendency to represent the will of the people is not considered comprehensively.


Some rejections that have occurred both in the public space and in the academic forum on the substance of the omnibus bill on job creation, ever since its planning, shows that from the beginning the omnibus bill on job creation had no sociological ties with society in general. This can set a bad precedent in the politics of the formation of laws and regulations in Indonesia. Where referring to the nature of the ideal statutory regulations that must have philosophical, sociological and juridical validity, the current omnibus bill on job creation cannot fulfil its sociological validity. So that it cannot be denied that a legal norm that does not have a sociological attachment, the legal norm will only be a tool of power in upholding the principle of legal certainty but does not show the value of justice and legal benefits. If a legal norm does not show the value of justice nor the benefits, then a legal norm cannot be maximally enforced. In addition, the use of the omnibus law method in the midst of regulating the substance of the omnibus bill on job creation is not representative of vulnerable groups such as workers and indigenous peoples. This shows that the omnibus law method in the politics of law and legislation in Indonesia has created a precedent. In addition, the omnibus bill on job creation has also shown that the mechanism for forming laws and regulations in Indonesia should be more efficient. It should refer to Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning Establishment of Laws and Regulations fully and not use the method of omnibus law which are generally used in common law countries. Use of the omnibus law method in the omnibus bill on job creation will allow formal and material testing at the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia. This test not only shows the responsiveness of the community, but also reflects that the regulation of substance in a statutory regulation has not yet instilled the value of legal certainty, the value of legal justice, and the value of legal usefulness in a comprehensive manner.





Sources



  • https://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2020/10/04/job-creation-omnibus-bill-set-to-be-passed-into-law-at-next-house-plenary-session.html



18 views0 comments
bottom of page