A Digest of Case Law on the Human Rights of Women - Asia Pacific ...

Nurhatina Hasibuan v Pt. Indonesia Toray Synthetics, etc. (Indonesia)
Working Agreement to make the mandatory retirement age the same for men and
women and imposed a daily fine for any delay in making the requisite changes. The
Court also ordered that the company maintain Ms Hasibuan as an employee until she
reached the new retirement age <strong>of</strong> 55 years.
In its decision, the Court expressly adopted the definition <strong>of</strong> discrimination used
in CEDAW. Further, it noted that in the Indonesian community “women are the
backbone to support the family economy” and for this reason, an identical retirement
age for men and women was essential.
Commentary
This decision is very progressive for women’s rights. The Court applied CEDAW
directly and did not accept the argument that CEDAW must adapt to local social
norms. Further, the Court recognised the importance <strong>of</strong> women’s labour not only
to themselves, but also to the family and society. This reasoning could be used by
advocates to argue for women’s equality, particularly in employment discrimination
cases.
In this case, the Court heard expert evidence with regard to biological and
psychological differences between men and women that sought to establish that
women were more likely than men to suffer mental and physical illness in the context
<strong>of</strong> work. The Court did not find this argument persuasive. The case is an excellent
precedent for advocates in any situation where a “mental/physical difference”
argument is being used to support discrimination against women.
Finally, this case is significant because it recognised that labour unions and boards
are also responsible for discrimination practices, in addition to employer companies.
This is useful because it defines the responsibilities <strong>of</strong> labour representatives to
actively protect all <strong>of</strong> their workers, including women.
16