Examination of Supreme Court Decision No. 42/P/HUM/2018: Legal Protection for Street Vendors

The Supreme Court Decision No. 42/P/HUM/2018 states that Article 25 paragraph (1) of the Jakarta Special Capital Region Provincial Regulation Number 8 of 2007 about Public Order (DKI Jakarta Regional Regulation 8/2007) does not have legally binding force because it violates Article 127 paragraph (1) of Law Number 22 of 2009 about Road Traffic and Transportation (LLAJ Law) and does not apply to the public. This case resulted in street vendors being evicted from the land where they sell even though it was their livelihood. The author feels the need to criticize this decision so that the author conducts normative legal research. The problem discussed in this study is whether the Supreme Court Decision No. 42/P/HUM/2018 is appropriate to cause street vendors to be unable to sell in certain areas and how the law should regulate street vendors. The author does not agree with the decision because it only uses the interpretation of the Governor's Regulation of the LLAJ Law even though if it uses other regulations and even higher regulations, the Constitution, then the use of sidewalks for street vendors can be a priority compared to the use for pedestrians. The Supreme Court should be more active in digging deeper into other laws and being able to interpret a rule constitutionally, something that is common even by first-instance court judges in the United States. The solution for pedestrians must be sought by the government by expanding sidewalks or making areas used by street vendors at certain times. Another solution is to expand the sidewalks so that they are in accordance with other regulations that will make street vendor areas an active economic area.