UGM Legal Expert: Constitutional Court Decision On Post-Democracy Corridor Election Law, But Entrusted To Strength

Gadjah Mada University constitutional law expert Zainal Arifin Mochtar spoke in the hall of Building I of the Indonesian Constitutional Court, Jakarta, Thursday (22/8/2024). (ANTARA/Fath Putra Mulya)

State law expert Gadjah Mada University Zainal Arifin Mochtar said the decision of the Constitutional Court regarding the judicial review of the Pilkada Law which was read out on Tuesday (20/8) was the right corridor for democracy.

"What is enforced by the Constitutional Court, I think is the right corridor, if we talk about healthier democracy," he said as quoted by ANTARA, Thursday, August 22.

According to him, the decision is a form of the Constitutional Court's efforts to improve the quality of democracy so that it should be appreciated. However, Zainal admitted that he was surprised that the good decision was not accommodated by the legislators.

"Herannya kemudian masih berusaha untuk disiasiasi oleh sebuah kekuatan," katanya.

Zainal regretted the discussion of the Pilkada Draft Law (RUU) which seemed rushed. He reminded that the Constitutional Court had emphasized that the making of laws must involve meaningful participation (meaningful participation).

"There is a law that is discussed within seven hours, then it will be passed less (less) than the next 24 hours," he said.

Zainal emphasized that his presence together with dozens of activists, students, civil society, and professors to the Constitutional Court was in the name of the future of Indonesian democracy.

"We are gathering here again, not on behalf of Ahok, not on behalf of Anies, not on behalf of anyone. We are here in the name of the future of Indonesian democracy," he said.

On Tuesday (20/8), the Constitutional Court in legal consideration of Decision Number 70/PUU-XXII/2024 emphasized that the calculation of the age requirements for regional head candidates, in Article 7 paragraph (2) letter e of the Pilkada Law, must be calculated since the determination of the candidate pair.

In addition, the Constitutional Court also changed the threshold for nomination of regional heads through Decision Number 60/PUU-XXII/2024. The Constitutional Court canceled Article 40 paragraph (3) of the Pilkada Law and declared Article 40 paragraph (1) of the Conditional Unconstitutional Pilkada Law.

Through this decision, the Constitutional Court stated that political parties that do not get seats in the DPRD can nominate a candidate for regional head.

The calculation of the requirements to propose a candidate pair is only based on the results of the legal votes acquired by political parties or coalitions of political parties in the election in the area concerned, which ranges from 6.5 to 10 percent.

Then, on Wednesday (21/8), the Legislation Body (Baleg) of the DPR and the Government agreed to continue discussing the Bill on the Fourth Amendment to Law Number 1 of 2015 or the Pilkada Bill at the nearest plenary meeting, in order to be ratified into law.

However, the Pilkada Bill has drawn polemics in the community because it does not fully accommodate the Constitutional Court's Decision Number 70/PUU-XXII/2024 and the Constitutional Court Decision Number 60/PUU-XXII/2024.

Today, the DPR is scheduled to hold a plenary meeting on the Revision of the Regional Head Election Law (RUU Pilkada). However, the meeting was postponed because the number of meeting participants was not quorum.