Public attention has once again been drawn to a legal policy issued by the Jokowi administration, which has received a mixed and widespread response from the public. The various responses from the public, on the one hand, include acceptance of the policy, while on the other, there are also rejections. The policy in question has garnered widespread attention.

The policy in question is Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPU) Number 2 of 2022 concerning Job Creation, which was enacted by the President on December 30, 2023. The PERPU was issued by the government for reasons that remain unclear, both by the President himself and by the Ministers in his working cabinet.

PERPU, in legal studies, is one of the legal regulations applicable in the systematics of legislation, as referred to in Article 7 Letter (c) of Law Number 12 of 2011 concerning the Formation of Legislation. As a legal regulation in Indonesia, the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPU), has different norms and enforcement in its formation. This is compared to other laws and regulations, such as Laws (UU), Government Regulations (PP), and Regional Regulations (PERDA). This is because PERPU are issued by the President in cases of urgent necessity, as stipulated in Article 22 Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, which states:

"In cases of urgent necessity, the President has the right to issue a Government Regulation in Lieu of Law."

As explained previously, the differences between PERPU and other laws and regulations include: First, there is an urgent need to resolve legal issues quickly based on the law. Second, the required law does not yet exist, resulting in a legal vacuum, or it does exist but does not accommodate the legal interests of the community. Third, this legal vacuum cannot be addressed by enacting a law according to standard procedures, as this would take a long time, whereas urgent situations require certainty to resolve.

This Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (Perpu) has certainly surprised many people, not just academics, practitioners, workers, and students. Many members of the general public have responded to the issuance of the PERPU with questions. To put it another way, the PERPU issued by President Jokowi's administration is like constructing a house without any knowledge of who built it, what materials were used, and how long the construction took.

Furthermore, the uproar surrounding this PERPU is exacerbated by the impression that the government is closing itself off after issuing the PERPU. Meanwhile, many are demanding an explanation regarding the reasons for issuing the PERPU. Furthermore, this silence is not only reflected in the Ministers in the working cabinet but also by the President and Vice President themselves.

Not only has the President, Vice President, and Ministers in their cabinets chosen to remain silent regarding the sudden issuance of the PERPU, but the existence of this PERPU is further exacerbated by allegations that it violates the Constitutional Court (MK) ruling, which previously declared Law Number 11 of 2020 concerning Job Creation to be constitutionally valid with conditions. This conditional constitutional ruling signals to lawmakers to correct the shortcomings in the Job Creation Law.

Furthermore, once the amendments referred to in the Constitutional Court's ruling have been amended by the legislators, the Job Creation Law will become final and binding. However, the issuance of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPU) by the Government has been perceived as a sign of disrespect for the Constitutional Court's ruling and its adherence to constitutional values. If the President himself disrespects the Constitutional Court's ruling, can the Constitutional Court still be considered a Guardian of the Constitution?

The existence of the PERPU on Job Creation has cast a negative light on the legal world and the government under President Jokowi's leadership. This is because the current conditions are not yet sufficient grounds for issuing a PERPU, especially since there has been no explanation from the PERPU's authors regarding the rationale for issuing the PERPU that can be explained to the public and/or general public.

The last time the Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal, and Human Rights, who was also Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court from 2008 to 2013, issued a statement regarding the rationale for issuing the PERPU, he stated that the underlying reasons for issuing the PERPU were due to two factors: First, predictions from four international financial institutions state that Indonesia's economic growth in 2023 will be challenging, reaching only 3-5%. According to the government, the predictions issued by these international financial institutions will fall far short of the 2023 economic growth target of at least 5.3%. Therefore, the issuance of a Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPU) is quite reasonable to support economic growth.

The second reason is the impact of the Russia-Ukraine war, which has resulted in a resource crisis and has also affected the global political map. According to Prof. Mahfud, the ongoing war has significantly influenced the global crisis and affected many countries around the world, including Indonesia, which has been disrupted by the war.

However, neither the first nor the second reasons presented by Prof. Mahfud have been able to address public doubts regarding the issuance of the PERPU on Job Creation. The Job Creation Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPU) was issued due to a pressing situation. The so-called pressing situation is not yet accurate. According to the author, this is because the determination of a pressing situation requires consideration of the current pressing situation, which will have dire consequences for the country, and not based solely on predictions.

Furthermore, the issuance of the Job Creation Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPU) at the end of 2022 appears to be an anomaly, given that predictions of economic growth and the Russia-Ukraine war are long-standing events. Conversely, if these two factors are the reason for the issuance of the PERPU, the government must explain why the PERPU was only issued at the end of 2022 and not during the early stages of these events.

The PERPU policy issued by the Presidential Regulation in Lieu of Law (PERPU) sets a bad precedent for the Jokowi administration and the ministers in his Working Cabinet, resulting in a loss of public trust in government policies. Furthermore, the policy was not and/or has not been clearly explained to the public as to why it was issued.

In fact, the issuance of the PERPU at the end of 2022 has confirmed the public's assumption that the government does not understand the context of global events and is unresponsive to the various economic and political upheavals occurring worldwide. Therefore, it is reasonable to say that the issuance of the PERPU on Job Creation was not outwardly driven by compelling circumstances. Rather, it is worth questioning why the government was so determined to issue the PERPU on Job Creation instead of amending the Job Creation Law, which had previously been ruled conditionally constitutional by the Constitutional Court.