Change Age Limits In Pilkada, Irrational Supreme Court Decision And Forced

Photo caption: Director of FIMA, Ray Rangkuti.(IG @ray2rangkuti)

JAKARTA - Director of the Indonesian Madani Circle (LIMA), Ray Rangkuti, said that the Supreme Court (MA) Decision Number 23 P/HUM/2024 which changed the age limit for regional head candidates in the 2024 Pilkada was irrational and too forced.

According to him, in general all positions requiring minimum age restrictions are calculated not when inaugurated, but when registering or being determined. Both candidates for election organizers, KPK commissioners, KY, or Constitutional Court judges, and others, and even candidates for Supreme Court justices.

"The age of nomination is not calculated since the inauguration, but since being registered or since being named as a candidate. Because that's where the authority of the Panel and the certainty of schedule is," said Ray, Sunday, June 2, 2024.

"This is where the Supreme Court's decision seems to smell like a Constitutional Court decision. Made not based on objective but subjective considerations. So the decision was too forced," he continued.

Ray explained that the Supreme Court's decision to change the age limit when the candidate is appointed, not when registering or being determined. In fact, the determination of the schedule for the inauguration of elected regional heads is not yet clear. This is because the inauguration of regional heads is no longer the authority of the KPU, but the authority of a president.

"The training schedule is very dependent on the schedule of the President as the head of state and government. As it is today, in fact, the government has not made a definitive schedule for when the inauguration of regional heads as a result of the 2024 Pilkada will be held," he said.

Problems can become even more complicated, Ray continued, considering that the inauguration of regional heads as a result of the 2024 Pilkada will not be carried out by the government who make schedules, but by the president who after that. This opens up the possibility of the president changing the schedule set by the previous government.

That's why the Supreme Court's decision contradicts the Supreme Court's goal of making new provisions, legal certainty. Setting the age limit since the inauguration is even more uncertain, compared to the previous provisions, which were calculated since the KPU's determination of the candidate pair. The Supreme Court's decision is contrary to the reason they canceled the PKPU," he said.