Zainal Arifin, Constitutional Law Expert from Gadjah Mada University (UGM) Yogyakarta when becoming a resource person in the Constitutional Webinar entitled "Ensuring Constitutional Compliance in Regional Head Elections" online on Friday (8/30/2024). Photo by MKRI.

---

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the MKRI – The Constitutional Court (MK) is the interpreter of the Constitution which has binding legal force in its interpretation. This was emphasized by a Constitutional Law Expert from Gadjah Mada University (UGM) Yogyakarta when became a  speaker for the Constitutional Webinar entitled "Ensuring Constitutional Compliance in Regional Head Elections" online on Friday (8/30/2024). This webinar was organized by the Court in collaboration with the Faculty of Law, Jenderal Soedirman University and 66 Vicon Members of Universities and Constitutional Villages throughout Indonesia.

Zainal, who is often called Uceng, added that many people say that the Court is the sole interpreter of the Constitution. However, for him, this is not appropriate because everyone can interpret the Constitution. For him, the Court has an interpretation that has permanent legal force. "If being asked, who has the interpretation of the constitution that has binding legal force in the context of the decision? The answer is the Constitutional Court. Remember, these are two different things. "The Court is not the only interpreter of the constitution, but if you ask who has the legal power to bind its interpretation through a decision process, yes, the Constitutional Court," said Zainal.

Zainal further mentioned on the commotion regarding decisions that must be used in making regulations regarding the age limit for regional head candidates between the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court. According to him, this is related to the issue of the constitutionality of norms because it stems from the review of the Regional Head Election Law to the Constitutional Court.

"Yesterday, when there was a commotion about the Supreme Court or Constitutional Court's decision regarding, for example, age 30, whether it was brought to 30 at the time of inauguration or 30 at the time of determining the candidate, that was clear to me. "Because there are two types of decisions, one Supreme Court decision, one Constitutional Court decision, because this is a question of constitutionality, the Constitutional Court decision must be used," he stressed in the event hosted by Enny Dwi Cahyani, Lecturer at Jenderal Soedirman University.

Zainal also emphasized that the Constitutional Court is the only institution that has the authority to provide binding legal interpretations of the Constitution. Although other institutions, such as the House of Representatives, can also interpret the Constitution, only the Constitutional Court's decisions have final legal force.

"You have to remember that its nature is that it is the sole interpreter which has binding legal force. Can the House of Representatives interpret it? That's OK. Everyone can interpret it, but if it has binding legal force, the type of decision is definitely the Constitutional Court. The debate here is whether if the Constitutional Court has decided, then the House of Representatives must rule or not? Well, that's a separate debate up to now. It depends on your sect. In America, there are usually two main schools that believe that the Constitutional Court's decision must be taken authoritatively and based on authority "Everyone must obey. There are also those on the other side who say no because they are constitutionalist populists who take into account numbers," he said.

Obeying the Constitutional Court's Decision

Zainal further said, if Court has decided, is the House of Representatives allowed to rule differently? He revealed that he was in the middle of the two poles. Normatively, he continued, the concept of ordinary constitutional law should be that the House of Representatives must obey. Because this is a constitutional interpretation decision that is legally binding under normal circumstances.

"So is it possible for the House of Representatives to override the Constitutional Court's decision and regulate it differently, I am opening a small scope for that. Because I certainly can't assume that the Court is definitely right. That's why, I said as a counter to the Constitutional Court which might make a mistake, I opened a small space where the House of Representatives could still regulate differently from what the Constitutional Court decided as long as there was a great need. And these needs are not personal needs, they are public needs at large. The second thing is, he has to explain that, he has to make that decision firmly and adequately to the public. "Why does he have to obey the ourt's decision this time and why next time does he have to disobey the court's decision," stressed Zainal.

For the information, the first Constitutional Webinar activity was held by the Faculty of Law, Pancasakti University, Tegal, Central Java and the Faculty of Law, Sebelas Maret State University, ending the series of 2024 Constitutional Webinar activities. The Constitutional Court as one of the actors in judicial power also takes responsibility for spreading and developing culture of awareness of the constitution. The coordination meeting was held to prepare the 2024 Constitution Webinar series for Increasing Constitutional Awareness Culture which will start from July to December 2024. (*)

Author           : Utami Argawati
Editor            : Lulu Anjarsari P.
Translator     : Donny Yuniarto (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.

---