A judicial review hearing of Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 to examine the petition, Monday (2/26/2024). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court held another judicial review hearing of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 on Monday, February 26, 2024. The petition No. 9/PUU-XXII/2024 was filed by Adoni Y. Tanesab, a university student. This second hearing was presided over by Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (chair), M. Guntur Hamzah, and Ridwan Mansyur.

The hearing was supposed to discuss the petition revision, but the Registrar’s Office reported that through his legal counsel the Petitioner had sent a letter to retract the petition.

“Is that true? I’d like your confirmation,” said Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat.

In response, legal counsel Marthen Boiliu said the Petitioner had considered to retract the petition. “We have considered the justices’ advice from the previous hearing and consulted with the Petitioner. In essence, the Petitioner has decided to retract this petition, Your Honor,” he said.

Also read: Court Decision on Presidential Tickets’ Age Challenged 

At the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, February 7 through his legal counsel, the Petitioner asserted that said decision is inconsistent with Decisions No. 29/PUU-XXI/2023, 51/PUU-XXI/2023, and 55/PUU-XXI/2023, in which the same article was challenged and the petitioners were declared to have had legal standing to file the petition. The Petitioner alleges that the decision has harmed for not providing legal certainty and legal justice.

“[His] right to choose candidate pair that should have been legitimized by a provision that has legal force and legal justice was not fulfilled, so [the Petitioner] filed a judicial review petition so that Decision (No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023) be annulled that he [will] believe that the candidates he choose would have legal basis that shows justice,” said legal counsel Marthen Boiliu.

In the petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare Article 169 letter q of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law), which reads “at least 40 (forty) years of age” unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “at least 40 (forty) years of age or has occupied/is occupying an office elected through a general election, including the election of heads of regions.” Thus, the norm would read in full, “at least 40 (forty) years of age or has occupied/is occupying an office elected through a general election, including the election of heads of regions.”

In Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023, the Court declared Article 169 letter q of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2017 No. 182, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia No. 6109), which stipulates presidential tickets be “at least 40 (forty) years of age” unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “at least 40 (forty) years of age or has occupied/is occupying an office elected through a general election, including the election of heads of regions” and now reads as such.

Author       : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Raisa Ayuditha
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.

---