Petitioner Marion at the ruling hearing of presidential tickets’ age limit in the Election Law, Tuesday (1/16/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) decided not to grant the material judicial review petition of Article 169 letter q of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law) as interpreted in Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023. The decision was delivered at a ruling hearing on Tuesday, January 16, 2024 in the plenary courtroom.

“[The Court] adjudicated, declares the Petitioner’s petition inadmissible,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo delivering the verdict for Decision No. 147/PUU-XXI/2023.

In its legal opinion delivered by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, the Court asserted that the Petitioner had not elaborated the connection between his profession as advocate and his taxpayer status as well as the norm petitioned for review and the potential loss of constitutional rights due to the norm. In other words, the Court did not find the Petitioner’s explanation of his status as voter or citizen with the right to vote in the 2024 Election.

Petitioner Lacks Legal Standing

Justice Saldi added that the Petitioner did not express a wish to run for or be endorsed in the presidential election. In addition, the Court did not find any evidence that he had suffered a loss of constitutional rights either factually or potentially due to the norm petitioned for review, so it saw no causality between the norm and the constitutional impairment, as referred to in Article 51 of the Constitutional Court Law and the Constitutional Court Decisions No. 006/PUU-III/2005 and No. 11/PUU-V/2007 and the decisions after it.

This was despite the fact that the Petitioner challenged a norm on minimum age for presidential tickets, which is one of the key norms on presidential election. Based on that legal opinion, the Court emphasized that the Petitioner lacked legal standing.

“Considering that because the Court had the authority to adjudicate the a quo petition but that the Petitioner did not have the legal standing to act as a petitioner, the Court did not consider the subject matter of the petition,” Justice Saldi said.

Also read:

RIS Constitution 1949 & UUDS 1950 Set Age of Presidential Tickets at 30

Petitioner Claims 40-Year Age Limit for Presidential Tickets Unconstitutional

At the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, November 29, advocate Marion said the article, as interpreted in Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023, was unconstitutional because the Constitutional Court did not mention a certain age as a requirement for presidential and vice-presidential candidates.

“Article 169 letter q of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections is constitutionally juridically flawed at the time of its formation or formulation,” he said.

However, he said that the minimum age of a presidential/vice-presidential candidate should be thirty years, not forty years. The age limit of thirty years was juridically constitutionally regulated and outlined in two constitutions.

The two constitutions in question are the Constitution of the Republic of the United States of Indonesia (UUD RIS), specifically Article 169 paragraph (3), and the Provisional Constitution of 1950 (UUDS 1950), specifically Article 45 paragraph (5). Although both were declared invalid by the issuance of the Decree of the President of the Republic of Indonesia Ir. Soekarno on the return to the 1945 Constitution on July 5, 1959

He argued that the minimum age limit of forty years may result in constitutional loss because every citizen has the right to equal opportunity in government. Then, if an amendment was to be made to Article 169 letter q of the Election Law as interpreted by the Constitutional Court in Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023, the Constitutional Court must make it without interference from authorized people or parties.

Therefore, he requested the Court to declare the formation of Article 169 letter q of Election Law not having clear legal basis, which violated the constitutional juridical foundation, and thus not legally binding. He also requested the Court to declare Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 on October 16, 2023 juridically constitutional and final and binding. 

Author       : Mimi Kartika
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Andhini S.F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---