This article was machine-drafted from the sources cited in its footnotes. It is not the official text of any law or court decision, and it is not legal advice (how articles are written).
Constitutional Court Decision 73/PUU-XXIV/2026Court case
CourtConstitutional Court of Indonesia (Mahkamah Konstitusi)
Case number73/PUU-XXIV/2026
Decided12 August 2026
Laws reviewedPasal 237 huruf c of Undang-Undang 1/2023 on the Criminal Code
Constitutional provisionsPasal 1(3), 28D(1) and 32(1) of the 1945 Constitution
RulingPetition declared inadmissible (tidak dapat diterima) for want of an object, the provision having been struck down in Decision 27/PUU-XXIV/2026

Constitutional Court Decision 73/PUU-XXIV/2026 is a 2026 ruling of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia on a petition for material review of Pasal 237 huruf c of Undang-Undang 1/2023 on the Criminal Code (Kitab Undang-Undang Hukum Pidana, KUHP), which punished with a fine the use of the state emblem for purposes other than those regulated by statute.[1][2] The petition was brought by an individual citizen, recorded in the decision as an advocate, and sought a conditional reading of the provision rather than its removal.[2:1][3] It is one of the constitutional review cases on criminal law in Indonesia decided on 12 August 2026.

The Court held that the petition was not barred as a repeat review, but did not reach its merits. Earlier the same day, in Decision 27/PUU-XXIV/2026, it had declared Pasal 237 huruf c unconstitutional and without binding force. The petition had therefore lost its object, and the Court declared it inadmissible.[4][5]

Petition

The petition, dated and registered on 18 February 2026, was revised on 10 March 2026.[6] Relying on the rule of law, fair legal certainty and the freedom to maintain and develop cultural values, in Pasal 1(3), 28D(1) and 32(1) of the 1945 Constitution, the petitioner argued that Pasal 237 huruf c revived in substance the prohibition in Pasal 57 huruf d and the penalty in Pasal 69 huruf c of Undang-Undang 24/2009 on the national flag, language, state emblem and national anthem, which the Court had declared unconstitutional in Decision 4/PUU-X/2012.[7]

Unlike the petitioners in Decision 27/PUU-XXIV/2026, the petitioner did not ask for the provision to be struck down. The petitioner argued that the use of the emblem in digital media could be directed at insulting or degrading it, and that a criminal rule remained necessary to protect the emblem and to avoid a legal vacuum, but that the provision should require an intent to insult. The relief asked the Court to declare Pasal 237 huruf c conditionally unconstitutional unless read to exclude anyone using the emblem to express love of the country, and to apply only to use intended to insult or degrade the emblem.[7:1][3:1]

Ruling

The Court decided the case without hearing the House of Representatives or the President, holding the petition clear enough under Pasal 54 of the Constitutional Court Law.[8] It first considered whether the provision could be reviewed again, since it had been challenged in Decision 36/PUU-XXI/2023, pronounced on 25 May 2023, which declared that petition inadmissible without reaching the merits. Because the present petition relied on further constitutional provisions, Pasal 1(3) and 28D(1), and on a different ground, the absence of any requirement of intent, it was not barred by Pasal 60 of the Constitutional Court Law or Pasal 72 of Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi 7/2025.[9]

The Court then noted that it had pronounced Decision 27/PUU-XXIV/2026 earlier on 12 August 2026, declaring Pasal 237 huruf c contrary to the 1945 Constitution and without binding legal force. The provision had thereby lost its existence and its relevance to the petition, which had lost its object and was not considered further.[4:1]

The operative order declared the petition inadmissible. The decision was reached in deliberation on 9 July 2026 by nine justices, with Suhartoyo presiding, and pronounced on 12 August 2026 in the absence of the petitioner; it records no dissenting opinion.[5:1]

CRPG's regulatory tracker published an account of the decision on 22 August 2026. That account states that the provision stands as enacted after the ruling; the decision records that it had been struck down the same day in Decision 27/PUU-XXIV/2026.[10][4:2]

See also

Identifiers Know ID K67 · Case number 73/PUU-XXIV/2026
What links here (5)

References


  1. [P] Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraphs [3.1]–[3.2]: jurisdiction over review of Pasal 237 huruf c of Undang-Undang 1/2023 (LN 2023/1, TLN 6842). Decision text held in the CRPG Constitutional Court database (mkri.db). https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎

  2. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraph [3.5]: text of Pasal 237 huruf c; the petitioner as an individual citizen and advocate; standing accepted ([4.2]). https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎

  3. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraph [2.1], part IV (Petitum), item 2. https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎

  4. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraphs [3.12] and [4.3]: quotation of item 2 of the operative order of Putusan MK 27/PUU-XXIV/2026, pronounced earlier on 12 August 2026; petition "kehilangan objek". https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎ ↩︎

  5. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, Amar Putusan: "Menyatakan permohonan Pemohon tidak dapat diterima"; deliberation on 9 July 2026, pronounced 12 August 2026 at 15.30 WIB without the petitioner present. Constitutional Court database record, case 73/PUU-XXIV/2026. https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎

  6. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraph [2.1]: petition dated and received 18 February 2026, registered in the e-BRPK on 18 February 2026, revised petition received 10 March 2026. https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎

  7. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraph [3.7], the Court's summary of the petitioner's arguments, points 1–7, including the reference to Putusan MK 4/PUU-X/2012 and Pasal 57 huruf d and 69 huruf c of Undang-Undang 24/2009. https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎ ↩︎

  8. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraphs [3.8]–[3.9]: exhibits P-1 to P-5 validated on 11 March 2026; no need to hear the parties under Pasal 54 UU MK. https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎

  9. [P] Putusan MK Nomor 73/PUU-XXIV/2026, paragraph [3.10]: Putusan MK 36/PUU-XXI/2023 (25 May 2023); Pasal 60 UU MK and Pasal 72 PMK 7/2025; petition not barred. https://s.mkri.id/public/content/persidangan/putusan/putusan_mkri_14805_1786524139.pdf ↩︎

  10. [E] "Constitutional Review of the Criminal Code State Emblem Offence: MK 73/PUU-XXIV/2026", CRPG regulatory tracker, crpg.id, 22 August 2026. https://crpg.id/constitutional-review-of-the-criminal-code-state-emblem-offence-mk-73-puu-xxiv-2026/ The post carries a notice that it is AI-generated; it is cited for the record of the development, not for its legal content. ↩︎