Constitutional Court Decision Final and Binding, Political Parties Reminded to Immediately Revise Election Law

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – Political parties are reminded that the decisions of the Constitutional Court, including the separation of national and local elections, are final and binding. Instead of questioning or rejecting them, it would be better for the political parties in parliament to promptly follow up on the Constitutional Court's decision by revising the Election Law so that the five-year democratic festivity can be conducted under updated regulations.

"The decision of the Constitutional Court is stated by the Constitution to be final and binding, applicable to all, including lawmakers. Declaring that the Constitutional Court's decision is not binding is a dangerous statement that threatens the rule of law and constitutional democracy in Indonesia," said Titi Anggraini, a lecturer in Election Law at the University of Indonesia, in Jakarta, Tuesday (1/7/2025).

Until now, the DPR has not begun to prepare for the follow-up to the Constitutional Court's decision. Although a consultation meeting was held the day after the Constitutional Court ruled on the separation of national and local elections, no decision has yet been made. Political parties in the parliament are questioning the Constitutional Court's ruling on elections, which they believe has been inconsistent since the 2000s.

The Nasdem Party has openly rejected the Constitutional Court's decision. The Nasdem Party considers the ruling to be problematic, violating the 1945 Constitution, and has the potential to create a constitutional crisis. "The Constitutional Court violates the principle of legal certainty, which is the principle of law that should not easily change, that judicial decisions must be consistent. This 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 is an internal morality of the legal system," said Lestari Moerdijat, a member of the Nasdem Party's High Council.

Titi regrets the attitude of political parties, especially the statement of the Nasdem Party which rejects the Constitutional Court's decision. Because, political parties should be able to provide a good example in legal and political education. Rejection of the Constitutional Court's decision means not respecting the design of checks and balances guaranteed by the constitution.

"The statement from Nasdem is not a form of good legal and political education. If a political party considers the Constitutional Court's decision to be non-binding, it could be very dangerous for the rule of law and the future of constitutional justice in Indonesia," he stated.

According to Titi, political parties in the parliament and the government should immediately seek appropriate ways to follow up on the Constitutional Court's decision. "Instead of rejecting the Constitutional Court's ruling by displaying a destructive attitude towards the constitution and constitutionalism in Indonesia, it would be better for the parties in parliament and the government to focus on following up on the Constitutional Court's decision. They should promptly initiate changes to the Election Law, as many of its provisions are no longer relevant to the latest developments in electoral regulations," she stated.

In fact, the revision of the Election Law has already been included in the list of priority bills for the National Legislative Program (Prolegnas) 2025. However, until now, the DPR, which is the initiator, has yet to discuss the preparation of the draft revision of the Election Law.

The Vice Chairman of Commission II of the DPR, Aria Bima, hopes that the leaders of the DPR will promptly discuss the draft of the Election Bill. Moreover, there is now a Constitutional Court ruling that alters the conduct of national and local elections. According to him, this Constitutional Court ruling needs to be addressed by revising the Election Law to prevent issues in the implementation of the 2029 elections.

"The sooner, the better. Don't let it happen, when the election is held, suddenly there is a Constitutional Court decision in the middle of the road. If (the Election Bill) is completed faster, the so-called judicial review can also be done before the election," he continued.

Moreover, this decision by the Constitutional Court has implications for the extension of the regional legislative council's term, thus it needs to be carefully considered. According to Aria, there is a need for a well-thought-out constitutional engineering to avoid political polarization.

"Indeed, the Constitutional Court's decision is the first and last that cannot be ignored. However, we want this constitutional engineering, in the context of the upcoming election, not to create political polarization," said the politician from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle.

Nevertheless, Aria stated that the PDI-P has not yet taken a stance on this Constitutional Court ruling. He mentioned that the PDI-P still requires input from various parties to assess the implications of the ruling on the party.