DPR Asked to Focus on Discussing Election Separation Decision, No Efforts to Delegitimize MK

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – The House of Representatives is urged to focus on discussing the implementation of the Constitutional Court's decision that separates the administration of national and local elections. Moreover, this decision is actually beneficial for political parties. It is important that the response from the House does not delegitimize the Constitutional Court.

"It is necessary to reflect on and envision the benefits of this two-stage election for political parties. I believe that there are more advantages," said constitutional law lecturer at Gadjah Mada University, Yance Arizona, when contacted on Thursday (3/7/2025).

Political parties benefit from the separation of the two elections as it provides them with a time gap to prepare the best candidates to be proposed in the national and local elections.

Unlike previous elections, political parties are struggling to find candidates to be proposed for the election of members of the DPR as well as the regional and provincial DPRD due to the simultaneous nature of the elections. Shortly after the legislative elections concluded, political parties were once again preoccupied with searching for candidates to be proposed for the regional head elections (pilkada).

As previously reported, through Decision Number 135/PUU-XXII/2024 read on Thursday (26/6/2025), the Constitutional Court separated the implementation of national elections and local elections starting in 2029.

The national election includes the presidential election and the election of members of the DPR and DPD, while the local election encompasses the election of provincial and district/city DPRD members as well as regional head elections.

The national elections are requested to be held first, while the local elections should be conducted at least 2 years and at most 2.5 years after the inauguration of the president and vice president or the inauguration of the members of the DPR and DPD.

Due to the separation of election administration benefiting political parties, according to Yance, it is important for the DPR along with the political parties that hold seats in the DPR to review it. He hopes that the response from the DPR and the political parties will not instead delegitimize the Constitutional Court.

"Indeed, if you look at the Constitutional Court's decision this time, it is debatable. However, what needs to be guarded against is that there should be no attempt to delegitimize it, and become a movement to cut or dwarf the Constitutional Court. After all, the plan to revise the Constitutional Court law is still in the hands of the DPR, right," said Yance.

What needs to be guarded against is that there should be no attempts at delegitimization, and that it should become a movement to reduce or dwarf the Constitutional Court.

The revision of the Constitutional Court Law aims to open the possibility for constitutional judges to be dismissed or replaced at any time by the proposing institutions—namely the President, the DPR, or the Supreme Court. This revision of the Constitutional Court Law was previously discussed by the DPR for the 2019-2024 period, but was ultimately not ratified due to public opposition. At the end of the term of the DPR 2019-2024, the revision of the Constitutional Court Law was decided to be handed over to the DPR for the 2024-2029 period.

Meanwhile, the Chairperson of the DPR, Puan Maharani, stated that all political parties with representation in the DPR are still reviewing the Constitutional Court's decision that separates the elections. After that, all parties plan to jointly express their opinions regarding the decision.

"We, as leaders consisting of political parties, are currently reviewing this matter, of course, because this decision has implications for all parties. As a political party, we will coordinate, whether formally or informally, to express our opinions collectively regarding this Constitutional Court ruling," said the Chairman of the DPP PDI-P, after the DPR Plenary Meeting today.

The PDI-P is also said to be awaiting a stance from Puan. The party led by Megawati Soekarnoputri is still reviewing the Constitutional Court's decision as it has the potential to violate the 1945 Constitution.

"There has been no response yet, as we are still examining the matter. We need to determine whether there are any violations in accordance with the Constitution, as elections are held every five years according to the Constitution," he said. One implication of the Constitutional Court's decision is that the next election for regional legislative council members must be postponed by 2 to 2.5 years from the five-year schedule set for 2029.

In addition to PDI-P, Gerindra is also reviewing the decision of the Constitutional Court. Nevertheless, there are already political parties that openly reject the decision. These are the Nasdem Party and the Prosperous Justice Party.

The Deputy Chairman of the Golkar Party, Ahmad Doli Kurnia, also expressed regret over the Constitutional Court's decision, which he deemed to exceed the court's authority. Furthermore, the binding provisions have the potential to violate the 1945 Constitution regarding the extension of the terms of regional legislators.

An extension of up to two and a half years, Ahmad Doli continued, could violate Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution. This article states that elections are held every five years, and those elected include the President, the House of Representatives, the Regional Representative Council, and the Regional People's Representative Council.

On the other hand, the decision of the Constitutional Court is final and binding. Therefore, Ahmad Doli continued, his party is currently seeking the best solution. For this reason, it is important that the discussion on the Election Bill begins promptly.

"Now we are faced with a dilemma. The Constitutional Court's decision is final and binding, and it is regulated in our constitution. However, if it is swallowed whole, especially the postponement of the DPRD election, some of us say it violates Article 22E, you know. This is what will be sought for a solution, and indeed the Election Bill must be discussed immediately," said Doli.

If the discussion on the Bill does not commence soon, Doli is concerned that there will be an increasing number of materials related to the Election Law that will be challenged in the Constitutional Court. With the Constitutional Court's decisions being final and binding, he believes that the lawsuits granted by the Court will diminish the creativity of lawmakers in drafting the revisions to the Election Law.

In the future, when the Election Bill is discussed, the DPR has promised to be open. Thus, input from the public will be absorbed, eliminating the need to submit a review to the Constitutional Court.