The repository administrator has not yet configured an RDF license.
OVERRULING MAHKAMAH KOSTITUSI: KAJIAN PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 73/PUU-XX/2022 DAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 62/PUU-XXII/2024
The election of the President and Vice President in Indonesia was conducted for the first time in 2004. Since the implementation of direct elections, numerous developments have occurred, one of which concerns the application of the presidential and vice-presidential nomination threshold (presidential threshold). The implementation of the PT is intended to strengthen the presidential system and, at the same time, is expected to simplify the existing multiparty system so that elections can be conducted more effectively and efficiently. However, the application of the PT has been perceived as infringing upon the constitutional rights of certain parties, as evidenced by the numerous petitions for judicial review submitted to the Constitutional Court (MK). At least approximately 34 petitions have been filed, of which 33 were rejected or declared inadmissible on the grounds that the challenged norm constituted an open legal policy, while the most recent petition was ultimately granted by the Court. This shift in the Constitutional Court’s perspective, or overruling, has triggered discussions concerning a comparative analysis of the Court’s overruling. The method employed in this study is normative legal research, drawing upon the theories of judicial review, overruling, and progressive law. The approach adopted is a conceptual comparative analysis that examines Constitutional Court Decision Number 73/PUU-XX/2022 and Constitutional Court Decision Number 62/PUU-XXII/2024. This research is descriptive-analytical in nature. The sources of legal materials consist of primary materials in the form of statutory regulations; secondary materials, including books, journals, and other scholarly works; and tertiary materials, such as encyclopedias and similar references. The technique for collecting legal materials is a literature review, which is subsequently analyzed qualitatively in order to address the formulated research questions. The findings of this study indicate that the Constitutional Court’s overruling occurred in two aspects, namely the substance of the norm and the legal standing of the petitioners. The Court no longer considers the PT to be a constitutional norm falling within the category of open legal policy; instead, it is viewed as a norm that violates rationality, morality, and justice to an intolerable degree. Furthermore, whereas the Court previously held that only political parties or individuals supported by political parties in nominating candidates had legal standing to challenge the PT, it has now shifted to the view that individual citizens also have the right to submit such petitions. These changes account for the differing outcomes in Decisions Number 73/2022 and 62/2024. In both decisions, the Court accepted its jurisdiction and acknowledged the legal standing of the petitioners. However, in Decision Number 73/PUU-XX/2022, the petition was rejected on the grounds that the presidential threshold strengthens the presidential system and simplifies the party system. By contrast, in Decision Number 62/2024, the Court granted the petition, reasoning that the challenged norm violated rationality, morality, and justice beyond tolerable limits.
FAKULTAS SYARI’AH DAN HUKUM, UIN SUNAN KALIJAGA YOGYAKARTA
OVERRULING MAHKAMAH KOSTITUSI: KAJIAN PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 73/PUU-XX/2022 DAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 62/PUU-XXII/2024 (Text)
OVERRULING MAHKAMAH KOSTITUSI: KAJIAN PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 73/PUU-XX/2022 DAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 62/PUU-XXII/2024 (Other)
HTML Summary of #74883 OVERRULING MAHKAMAH KOSTITUSI: KAJIAN PERBANDINGAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 73/PUU-XX/2022 DAN PUTUSAN MK NOMOR 62/PUU-XXII/2024