Eka Yudha Saputra, Jakarta – Indonesia's Constitutional Court has granted a petition challenging the 1997 Military Court Law in full, ruling that lawmakers must revise the legislation within two years to clarify the jurisdiction of military courts over soldiers accused of criminal offenses.
The ruling, issued in case No. 260/PUU-XXIII/2025 on Thursday, October 15, 2026, concerns Article 9, point 1, of Law No. 31 of 1997 on Military Courts, particularly the phrase "criminal offenses."
"Granting the petitioners' request in its entirety," Constitutional Court Chief Justice Suhartoyo said while reading the ruling at the court building in Jakarta.
The court ruled that Law No. 31 of 1997 is conditionally unconstitutional and will lose its binding legal force if lawmakers fail to amend it within two years of the ruling.
Military courts and general criminal offenses
The petition was filed by Lenny Damanik and Eva Melina boru Pasaribu, who argued that Article 9, point 1, does not clearly define the authority of military courts to try Indonesian Military (TNI) personnel accused of ordinary criminal offenses. Under the existing provision, jurisdiction is tied primarily to the accused's status as a soldier rather than the type of offense committed.
In its legal reasoning, the court said soldiers accused of ordinary crimes should be tried in general courts to ensure accountability and reduce the risk of impunity.
"If an offense committed by a soldier is an ordinary criminal offense, it is formally more appropriate for it to be examined by a general court," Constitutional Court Justice Enny Nurbaningsih said while reading the court's legal considerations.
The court also criticized delays in drafting a new Military Court Law, as required under Law No. 34 of 2004 on the TNI. It said lawmakers had no alternative but to expedite the drafting of new legislation.
The court ordered a comprehensive restructuring of Law No. 31 of 1997, including the integration of the military justice system under a single authority, the Supreme Court.
"Regarding the restructuring of Law No. 31 of 1997, the court considers that lawmakers need a maximum of two years to make the necessary amendments," Enny said.
Petitioners cite risk of impunity
The case was filed by Lenny Damanik and Eva Meliani Br. Pasaribu, who challenged Article 9, point 1, in relation to Articles 43, paragraph 3, and 127 of the Military Court Law.
Their lawyer, Ibnu Syamsu Hidayat, argued that impunity for military personnel violates the rule of law and the principle of equality before the law. The petitioners also warned that the arrangement could weaken civilian supremacy in a democratic system of government.
They argued that the military courts' jurisdiction taking precedence over that of general courts conflicts with the principles of a constitutional democracy, in which civilian authority stands above military power.
According to the petitioners, the dual jurisdiction stems from Article 9, point 1, which they said gives active-duty TNI personnel special status by allowing them to be tried exclusively in military courts, even when accused of ordinary crimes.
They argued that this arrangement risks creating impunity and undermining equal treatment before the law.
"The phrase 'trying criminal offenses' in Article 9, point 1, of Law No. 31 of 1997 opens the door to broad interpretations of military courts' authority. It allows them to try not only soldiers or persons treated as soldiers for military crimes and disciplinary violations, but also other offenses, including corruption, traffic violations, domestic violence, narcotics, psychotropic substances and child protection cases," Ibnu said during the petition's initial hearing at the Constitutional Court on January 8, 2026.
Source: https://en.tempo.co/read/2121676/why-is-indonesias-military-court-law-facing-revisio