Preliminary hearing for the judicial review of the age requirement for candidates in the Regional Election Law for cases No. 88, 89, and 90/PUU-XXII/2024, Monday (7/29/2024). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — On Monday, July 29, 2024, the Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing for three cases: No. 88/PUU-XXII/2024, 89/PUU-XXII/2024, and 90/PUU-XXII/2024. The Petitioners challenge Article 7 paragraph (2) letter e of Law No. 10 of 2016 on Regional Elections (Pilkada Law) on the starting point to count the minimum age of regional head candidates.

Article 7 paragraph (2) letter e of the Pilkada Law reads, “Candidates for Governor and candidates for Vice Governor, candidates for Regent and candidates for Vice Regent, and candidates for Mayor and candidates for Vice Mayor as referred to in paragraph (1) shall meet the following requirements: e. be at least 30 (thirty) years old for candidates for Governor and candidates for Vice Governor, and 25 (twenty-five) years old for candidates for Regent and candidates for Vice Regent and candidates for Mayor and candidate for Vice Mayor.”

In the petition, the Petitioners argue that the article does not clearly specify when the minimum age of a regional head candidate should be calculated. They claim that this lack of clarity undermines legal certainty regarding their constitutional right to vote, thus violating the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.

“The a quo article does not clearly define when the candidate’s age should be calculated,” said the Petitioner of case No. 90/PUU-XXII/2024, Syukur Destieli Gulo, before Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra (panel chair) and Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat and Asrul Sani in one of the Court’s panel courtrooms.

The Petitioners explained that this provision is the basis for the General Elections Commission (KPU) to draw up Article 4 paragraph (1) letter d of the KPU Regulation No. 9 of 2020. In this regulation, the KPU states that the age of regional head candidates should be calculated from the date of candidate pair determination.

However, the Supreme Court (MA), through its ruling, interpreted this KPU provision to mean that the minimum age should be calculated from the inauguration of the elected candidate pairs. According to the Petitioners, determining the minimum age from the inauguration date disregards and disrespects their right to be elected.

Therefore, they request a judicial review of this article to ensure legal certainty, even though they acknowledge that the article falls within the realm of open legal policy for lawmakers.

The Petitioners of Case No. 90/PUU-XXII/2024 explained that the provision following the Supreme Court’s decision has allowed candidates who do not meet the minimum age requirement at the time of voting to be approved. Thus, in their petition, they request the Court to interpret Article 7 paragraph (2) letter e of the Pilkada Law to mean that the minimum age requirement should be calculated from the date of voting.

Meanwhile, the Petitioners of Case No. 89/PUU-XXII/2024 request the Court to interpret the minimum age requirement from the date of candidate pair determination. The Petitioners of Case No. 88/PUU-XXII/2024 request the Court to interpret it from the date of candidate pair registration.

Justices’ Advice

Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat stated that the article being reviewed clearly falls within the realm of open legal policy, which is not within the judiciary’s authority unless it truly violates human rights. However, he advised the Petitioners to provide clear and strong arguments showing how the article contradicts the 1945 Constitution and should explain why their petitums are constitutionally justified.

“The judiciary cannot alter something that is an open legal policy. You should show how the article contradicts the Constitution,” he explained.

Additionally, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra emphasized that Constitutional Justice Anwar Usman had already stated in the justice deliberation meeting (RPH) that he would not participate in ruling on petitions related to the minimum age requirement for regional head candidates. Several petitions, including Case No. 90/PUU-XXII/2024, requested his exclusion from the examination.

“In the [justice deliberation meeting], [Justice Anwar Usman] already stated that he would not participate in ruling on petitions related to this age issue. This needs to be conveyed to avoid any suspicion later,” Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra said.

Before adjourning the hearing, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra announced that the Petitioners could revise the petition and submit it no later than Monday, August 12 at 08:00 WIB.

Author            : Mimi Kartika
Editor             : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR                 : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
Translator      : Dzaki Difa Al Hadiid/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.

---