A Series of Reasons Nasdem Rejects MK Decision to Separate National and Local Elections

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – The Nasdem Party rejects the Constitutional Court Decision Number 135/PUU-XXII/2024, which separates the schemes for national and regional elections. The Nasdem Party considers the decision to be problematic, violating the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, and has the potential to create a constitutional crisis.

The rejection was conveyed by Nasdem Party High Council Member Lestari Moerdijat. In the Nasdem Party DPP's statement received by Kompas, Tuesday (1/7/2025), it was stated that the separation of the Presidential, DPR, DPD, Regional Head and DPRD Elections carried out by the Constitutional Court through decision Number 135/PUU-XXII/2024 had violated the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, Nasdem views that the Constitutional Court's decision has no binding force and is an unconstitutional decision.

"It is important to understand that the election of members of the Regional People's Representative Council (DPRD) and regional heads is part of the electoral regime. The affirmation of the DPRD as an electoral regime is explained in Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution, while the regional elections as an electoral regime are emphasized in Constitutional Court Decision 95/2022. Therefore, constitutionally, elections must be held every five years, regardless of the different election times," said Lestari, who also serves as the Deputy Chairperson of the MPR.

On Thursday (26/6/2025), the Constitutional Court, through Decision Number 135/PUU-XXII/2024, stated that national and local elections will be held separately starting in 2029. The national election to elect the president and vice president, as well as members of the House of Representatives and Regional Representative Council, will be conducted first. After a gap of approximately two to two and a half years, it will be followed by local elections to elect members of the Regional People's Representative Council, governors, regents, and mayors.

Furthermore, according to Lestari, the implementation of the Constitutional Court's decision can result in a constitutional crisis, even a constitutional deadlock. Because, if the Constitutional Court's decision is implemented, it can actually result in a violation of the constitution.

They exemplified that Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution states that elections are held every five years. Furthermore, elections are conducted to elect the President and Vice President, members of the DPR, DPD, and DPRD. Thus, when elections are not held after the five-year term of the DPRD, it constitutes a constitutional violation.

If the term of office for members of the Regional House of Representatives (DPRD) is extended after the completion of the 5-year period, for Nasdem, this would place the members of the DPRD in a position to serve and hold office without a democratic foundation. In fact, the position of DPRD members is a political position that can only be held based on the results of elections as stipulated in Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution.

"This means that based on the constitution, there is no other way besides elections that can provide legitimacy for someone to become a member of the Regional People's Representative Council. Carrying out the duties of representing the people without obtaining legitimacy from the people through elections is unconstitutional," stated Lestari.

Furthermore, according to Lestari, with the decision, the Constitutional Court has actually entered and taken legislative authority which is the authority of the DPR and the Government. She views that the Constitutional Court has actually become a negative legislative or acts as a revoker of laws that are not its authority in a democratic legal system and does not use the moral reading method in interpreting the law and the constitution.

"The Constitutional Court violates the principle of legal certainty, which is a principle of law that should not easily change, that judicial decisions must be consistent. From this, it clearly emphasizes the importance of legal certainty and stability within the legal system, and inconsistent and fluctuating judicial decisions can lead to uncertainty and public distrust in the legal system; this serves as the internal morality of the legal system," said Lestari.

To address this, Nasdem urges that a solution must be found for this constitutional crisis. Everything must return to adherence to the constitution. The choice of the electoral system must revert to the authority of the lawmakers.

Not only that, Nasdem urged the DPR to request an explanation from the Constitutional Court. The DPR was also asked to regulate how the Constitutional Court interprets constitutional norms in expressing the statesmanship inherent in its judges.

Meanwhile, until now, the DPR has not yet taken a stance on the Constitutional Court's decision to separate the implementation of national and local elections. Nevertheless, from the results of the leadership meeting of the DPR along with the leaders of several parliamentary supporting tools and ministers at the Parliament Complex in Jakarta on Monday (30/6/2025), there are indications of similar rejection from the DPR.

Chairman of Commission II of the DPR, Rifqinizamy Karsayuda, stated after the meeting that the Constitutional Court's decision to separate national and local elections raises several serious legal issues. In addition to potentially exceeding the authority of the lawmakers, the decision is also considered contradictory to previous rulings of the Constitutional Court.

"From our preliminary study, there are at least several very serious legal issues. First, the decision of the Constitutional Court precedes the formation of the Constitution, whereas the Constitution states that regional heads are elected democratically. The meaning of democratically can refer to either direct or indirect elections. However, the Constitutional Court concluded that they must be elected through elections, meaning direct elections," said Rifqinizamy.

He reminded that in 2019, the Constitutional Court had issued Decision Number 55/PUU-XVII/2019, which provided six options for the synchronization model of elections and entrusted the choice to the lawmakers through an open legal policy. However, in its latest decision, the Constitutional Court itself determined one of those six models.

"So, if compared to the previous Constitutional Court decision, this seems contradictory. Previously, we were given the space to choose. Now the Constitutional Court has determined it itself. Meanwhile, the 2029 election is still a long way off and we are currently preparing the revision of the law," said the Nasdem politician.

Another issue that has also been highlighted by the DPR is regarding the term of office and the scheduling of elections. If the regional legislative council elections are held two years after the DPR elections, there is a potential violation of Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution, which states that elections are to be held every five years to elect members of the DPR and the regional legislative councils simultaneously.

"If the regional legislative council elections are not held every five years, particularly from 2029 to 2031, it could lead to interpretations that we are violating the constitution. Therefore, allow us to seriously delve into this matter," said Rifqinizamy.

According to the Vice Chairman of Commission II of the DPR from the Democratic Party faction, Dede Yusuf, the Constitutional Court's decision regarding the separation of national and regional elections will have widespread implications for several laws. Therefore, Commission II, along with other relevant working committees, agreed to first prepare an academic study before taking a stance.