Aceh – Indonesia, The Constitutional Court ruled that the judicial review petition against Article 252 Paragraph (1) of Law Number 1 of 2023 on the Criminal Code, commonly known as the Witchcraft Article, has been officially withdrawn by the applicants.
According to the record of the Constitutional Court’s decree in Jakarta on Wednesday, the judicial review of the Witchcraft Article was filed by five law students from Pamulang University. The petitioners chose to withdraw their application because they had not adequately outlined specific, actual, or potential constitutional harm. Up to this point, the petitioners’ damages remained purely academic.
“The Justices’ Deliberative Meeting on September 22 concluded that the withdrawal of petition Number 327/PUU-XXIV/2026 is legally grounded. Therefore, the applicants cannot re-file the a quo petition,” said Suhartoyo during the decree reading session in Jakarta on Tuesday, September 29, 2026.
Based on the decree, the Constitutional Court granted the withdrawal request, formally declared the petition withdrawn, and ruled that the applicants cannot re-submit the case.
The petition was filed by Bambang Sujatmiko along with Andika Firmanta Sitepu, Reka Violyta Priti Sari, Ayu Novalia Sundari, and Audia Rahman to review the phrase “offering hope” in Article 252 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.
The article states that any person who declares themselves to possess supernatural powers, announces, offers hope, advertises, or provides services to others claiming their actions can cause illness, death, or physical or mental suffering to someone else shall be punished.
Such acts carry a maximum prison sentence of one year and six months or a maximum fine under Category IV.
The applicants previously argued that the phrase “offering hope” lacked clear boundaries, parameters, or standards regarding which actions could be classified as a criminal offense.
“The existence of the phrase ‘offering hope’ without clear parameters fails to provide an adequate limiting function on the authority of law enforcement officers in determining whether the elements of a criminal act are met,” Bambang said during the preliminary hearing on Tuesday (8/9).
The applicants contended that this situation could potentially cause the boundaries of criminalization to be determined by the interpretation of law enforcement officers or agencies, rather than solely based on identifiable limits within statutory norms.
The judicial review petition was subsequently withdrawn as the applicants stated that the injury they experienced remained strictly academic. The confirmation of the withdrawal took place during a hearing originally scheduled for petition revisions.
The review petition had drawn attention during the preliminary examination because it addressed legal norms regarding supernatural powers, often dubbed the Witchcraft Article.
During the session, Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Saldi Isra highlighted the legal standing of the applicants and its relation to the targeted individuals under Article 252 Paragraph (1) of the Criminal Code.
“So, anyone who declares themselves to possess supernatural powers. Do you have supernatural powers?” Saldi asked.
Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Adies Kadir questioned the applicants’ personal experiences regarding sorcery to examine their legal standing in the case.
Adies asked whether any of the applicants had ever practiced sorcery, been targeted by sorcery, or trained under a sorcerer. The applicants replied that they had not.
“That’s why we are confused about where your legal standing lies,” Adies remarked.***