The Minimum Requirements For Presidential And Vice Presidential Candidates Graduated From High School Are Not Wrong, But Concerned

JAKARTA The Constitutional Court (MK) has again rejected a lawsuit regarding the requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates to be at least undergraduate or undergraduate education. The Constitutional Court's decision is a dilemma, because on the one hand, higher education is needed to become a public official, but on the other hand, Indonesia has a 12-year school mandatory slogan.

It was Hanter Oriko Siregar who filed a lawsuit for the Constitutional Court to change the requirements for presidential and vice presidential candidates from at least SMA to S1. However, the lawsuit with case number 154/PUU-XXIII/2025 was rejected by the Constitutional Court. This is the second time Hanter's lawsuit has been rejected by the Constitutional Court with the same case.

In a trial held in the Court Court Courtroom on September 29, the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Suhartoyo emphasized that he rejected the applicant's application in its entirety.

In the legal consideration of the Court read out by Constitutional Justice Ridwan Mansyur, the Court assessed that the requirements for the presidential and vice-presidential candidates at least S1 were categorized as open legal policies for legislators which were still considered constitutional.

This can apply as long as it does not violate morality, does not violate rationality, is not an intolerant injustice, and does not exceed the authority of the legislators. According to the Court, such requirements can be regulated, as long as they do not contain discriminatory elements," said Ridwan.

That means, to nominate yourself as a presidential and vice presidential candidate, you only need to at least graduate from high school. This Constitutional Court decision has become a polemic in the community. On the one hand, the minimum requirement for education for high school to nominate presidential and vice presidential candidates is considered irrelevant to the current situation.

Moreover, the people also compare with many companies that provide minimum S1 education requirements in each job vacancy. On the other hand, the minimum requirement for education for S1 to nominate for presidential and vice-presidential candidates is considered to narrow the right of citizens to run.

Political observer and Executive Director of the Indonesia Political Opinion (IPO) Dedi Kurnia Syah is of the view that in general this decision is dilemmatic because changing the minimum requirements for presidential and vice presidential education will intersect with other laws on education. So far, in Indonesia only has a 12-year school mandatory slogan.

"That means the obligation is only up to high school, but this is also just a slogan, not a law. So it has an impact on the requirements of public rights, including to run for public officials," said Dedi.

"So it is correct what was decided by the Constitutional Court, even though the pressure to make the minimum requirement for a bachelor is important, but not urging the Constitutional Court, but the DPR because that is where the producer of the law is," he added.

Dedi also compared this situation with when the Constitutional Court granted the presidential candidate age threshold in 2023. At that time, the Constitutional Court decided that anyone could run for themselves even though they were not 40 years old, on the condition that they had been elected through the election, either as a DPR / DPD, governor, or mayor.

"We still think that's wrong, because it shouldn't be the Constitutional Court's authority to decide the law," said Dedi.

"It is quite worrying if the threshold for drinking education for the highest leadership candidates is only high school, one side of us has the potential to get an intellectually and emotionally immature leader," he asserted.

Contacted separately, political analyst and founder of the KedaiKOPI Survey Institute Hendri Satrio still views the Constitutional Court's decision on education as a minimum of presidential and vice presidential candidates, because in Indonesia currently there are more high school graduates than S1.

Those who are not allowed to make it up. So for example, the education has not arrived (not yet passed), but is tricked as if it has. That's just not allowed. I think this decision is fine," he said.

Head of the Central Statistics Agency (BPS) Amalia Adininggar Widyasanti said, based on BPS data in 2024 there were 30.85 percent of Indonesians over the age of 15 who had high school diplomas or equivalent.

Meanwhile, of all Indonesians over the age of 15, only 10.20 percent of them completed their education at the university stage.

Dean of the Faculty of Law, University of Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta (UMY) Prof. Iwan Satriawan respects the Constitutional Court's decision which considers the decision to protect the rights of citizens to run. However, he considered that the Constitutional Court did not consider the public interest in ensuring the quality of the candidate for national leader.

"The Constitutional Court should also look at aspects of improving the quality of people who will be made presidential or vice presidential candidates by raising educational standards. That's the substance," said Iwan.

Personally, Iwan supports the minimum requirement for presidential and vice-presidential education to be increased to S1. According to him, in a country as big as Indonesia, which has large S1, S2, and S3 graduates, it is not difficult to find a candidate for leader with this qualification.

"To apply for jobs alone, many require a minimum S1. The President is a top leader who will lead the country. Imagine if the president's education level was lower than some of his people, psychologically it could cause problems," he said.

Iwan gave an example, many developed countries are led by figures who are graduates of well-known universities, reflecting their vision and strong capacity in building the nation.

The Constitutional Court in its decision assessed that the increase in educational requirements has the potential to limit the constitutional rights of citizens. However, Iwan is of different view. He considered that the right to vote should be expanded, but the right to be elected must consider qualifications.

"Just a judge at least a bachelor's degree, there is no major judge who graduated from high school. So the president, as the supreme leader, should have good educational qualifications because he is an example," he added.

Furthermore, Iwan highlighted the reason why the Constitutional Court rejected the lawsuit. According to the Constitutional Court, raising the educational requirements is the legislative realm through the formation of laws, not the authority of the Constitutional Court.

The MK said it was only authorized to cancel articles that were contrary to the constitution. If you want to change the norm, that's the territory of the DPR, not the Constitutional Court," he explained.

Although the Constitutional Court consistently refuses to create new norms in this case, Iwan assesses that the substance of the decision raises concerns. Countries are at risk of losing the opportunity to ensure that prospective leaders have higher educational qualifications and are in line with the needs of the nation in the future.