The Constitutional Court Does Not Accept The Test On Youth Age Limit Materials, Those Of You Who Are 31 Years Old

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court (MK) cannot accept a judicial review of Law Number 40 of 2009 concerning Youth which asks that the maximum age limit for youth be increased to 40 years from the previous 16'30 years.

"Declare that the petitioner's application is unacceptable," said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Suhartoyo reading the verdict of Case Number 178/PUU-XXIII/2025 in the Plenary Court Session Room, Jakarta, Thursday, October 30.

The Court could not accept the request because the applicant did not have a legal standing. The DPD of the DKI Jakarta National Youth Committee (KNPI) requested the case.

According to the Constitutional Court, General Chairperson Husnul Jamil, Secretary General Syafiqurrohman, Director of Legal Aid Institutions (LBH) Hamka Arsad Refra, and LBH Secretary M. Isbullah Djalil did not have the legal position to represent KNPI DKI Jakarta.

"In the description of the legal position, the applicant cannot prove in the deed of establishment and/or the articles of association and the applicant's household budget, namely KNPI regarding the organs that have the right to represent for and on behalf of KNPI inside and outside the court," said Constitutional Justice Arsul Sani reading out legal considerations.

Because the applicant does not have a legal standing, the Court does not consider the main application submitted further.

In this case, the DKI Jakarta KNPI questioned the constitutionality of Article 1 paragraph (1) of the Youth Law which reads, 'Youth is an Indonesian citizen who enters an important period of growth and development aged 16 to 30 years'.

The norm of the article is considered to limit the definition of youth to only in the age range of 16'30 years so that it legally issues the age group above it, which is 31'40 years from the youth category.

In fact, according to the petitioner, 31'40 years old citizens are still included in the productive phase, have leadership capacity, and actively play a role in youth activities and social development.

In her petition, the applicant shared that the experience was rejected to participate in youth programs, both from the APBN and APBD, because there was a limit on youth age to only up to 30 years old.

In addition, the petitioner also highlighted the potential for constitutional loss if the norm of the article was not changed. One of them is that the termination of the regeneration of natural regeneration within the KNPI body because most of the administrators who enter the age of over 30 years are no longer legally recognized as youth.

Therefore, the DKI Jakarta KNPI argued that Article 1 paragraph (1) of the Youth Law contradicts Article 28C paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution which regulates the constitutional rights of citizens to participate collectively in building the nation.

In addition, the applicant also considered that the article was contrary to Articles 28D paragraphs (1) and (3) which mandated that everyone had the right to legal certainty and had equal opportunities in the government.

In its petitum, the petitioner asks that the article be interpreted as 'Youth is an Indonesian citizen who enters an important period of growth and development aged 16 to 40 years'.