Court Ruling Spurs Constitutional Clash in Indonesia

Legislator accuses the Constitutional Court of overstepping its authority, sparking debate over separation of powers.

A recent ruling by Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (MK) separating national and regional elections has ignited a firestorm, with some critics claiming the court has exceeded its constitutional mandate.

Legislator’s Critique

**Nurdin Halid**, Deputy Chairman of the House of Representatives Commission VI of the Golkar Faction, argues that the Constitutional Court (MK) has overstepped its authority, creating legal precedents beyond the purview of the legislative and executive branches. According to **Halid**, “The Constitutional Court has been too far from entering the realm of forming the law so that a number of Constitutional Court decisions become constitutional polemic. The Constitutional Court entered the domain which was not the authority of the Constitutional Court.”

**Halid** contends that the court’s decision contradicts Article 22e paragraphs 1 and 2 of the 1945 Constitution, which mandates elections, including DPRD elections, every five years. He suggests that the ruling introduces uncertainty into Indonesia’s democracy, governance, and financial planning.

Concerns Raised

The ruling could trigger widespread confusion and impact various aspects of governance, according to **Halid**. He notes potential issues with regional government law, particularly Article 39 paragraph (1) of Law Number 23 of 2014, which stipulates a five-year term for regional heads and their deputies. Despite his reservations, **Halid** stated he respects the court’s decision, while cautioning that the court’s authority is limited to canceling laws deemed unconstitutional.

Moreover, **Halid** questioned the finality of the court’s decisions, suggesting that future judges could overturn current rulings, potentially transforming the court into a judicial and legislative body. The Constitutional Court’s power to overrule the Supreme Court further complicates matters, he added.

Call for Constitutional Reform

**Nurdin Halid** is urging the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) to convene a special session to restore the original 1945 Constitution. He advocates for amendments and a formal interpretation of the Constitution’s articles, given the deletion of the original explanatory section.

A number of political parties have also voiced concerns, with some suggesting the court’s decision could be unconstitutional. There is a growing perception that the Constitutional Court is establishing new legal norms independently of the government and the DPR.

Government Review

The Minister of Home Affairs, **Tito Karnavian**, announced that the government is reviewing the Constitutional Court’s decision. According to **Karnavian** the government will consult with the Indonesian Parliament and coordinate with various ministries to assess the decision’s implications and constitutionality. “We are still reviewing, we study, we will meet between the government first. With the Ministry of Setneg, then the Ministry of Law, maybe with the Coordinating Minister for Politics and Security,” said **Tito**.

In 2024, Indonesia faced challenges in coordinating its simultaneous presidential and legislative elections, with logistical issues and delays reported across several regions (The Jakarta Post).

Expert Analysis

Here’s a related video:

The debate surrounding the Constitutional Court’s decision highlights ongoing tensions regarding the balance of power and the interpretation of constitutional principles in Indonesia.