Perludem, Petitioner of case No. 135/PUU-XXII/2024, at the ruling hearing for the judicial review of the Election Law and the Regional Election Law, Thursday (6/26/2025). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) has ruled that, starting 2029, constitutionally valid general elections must be conducted by separating the national election—for members of the DPR (House of Representatives), DPD (Regional Representatives Council), and the president/vice president—from the local election—for members of provincial and regency/city DPRD (Regional Legislative Council), as well as governors-vice governors, regents-vice regents, and mayors-vice mayors. Accordingly, the simultaneous election model known as the “five-ballot boxes” will no longer apply. The separation is intended to improve election quality and simplify the process for voters in exercising their democratic rights.

This is part of the Court’s ruling in Decision No. 135/PUU-XXII/2024, filed by the Association for Elections and Democracy (Perludem). The decision was delivered at a ruling hearing on Thursday, June 26, 2025 in the plenary courtroom.

The Court also noted that, to date, lawmakers have not amended Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections following Constitutional Court Decision No. 55/PUU-XVII/2019, delivered on February 26, 2020. Factually, efforts are underway to reform all election-related legislation.

“In this context, it is important for the Court to affirm that all existing election models, including regional elections for governors-vice governors, regents-vice regents, and mayors-vice mayors thus far, remain constitutional,” stated Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra.

Undermining Regional Development Issues

In its legal considerations, the Court observed that scheduling presidential and legislative elections close to the regional head elections deprives voters of sufficient time to assess the performance of those elected nationally. Moreover, the combination of DPRD election with national-level election (DPR, DPD, and president/vice president) tends to overshadow regional development issues with national political narratives.

According to the Court, development challenges at the provincial and regency/city levels should remain a priority and must not be eclipsed by national issues put forward by candidates contesting national-level positions.

Weakening Political Party Institutionalization

The Court also found that holding the legislative and presidential election less than a year apart from the regional election undermines political parties’ ability to prepare competent candidates. As a result, said Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat, political parties are more likely to adopt a pragmatic approach rather than uphold ideological principles.

The compressed timeline prevents parties from effectively recruiting legislative candidates at three levels of government while simultaneously preparing presidential candidates. This situation weakens party institutionalization and makes parties more vulnerable to the realities of transactional politics.

“As a consequence, political nominations become highly transactional, distancing elections from democratic ideals. The evidence shows that political parties are often compelled to recruit candidates based solely on popularity for electoral gains,” Justice Arief explained.

Impact on Election Implementation

Justice Arief further pointed out that overlapping phases of national and regional election preparations—as occurred in the 2024 election—created a heavy administrative burden on election organizers, adversely affecting the quality of election implementation. Moreover, this time compression leaves a prolonged idle period for electoral bodies.

“This renders the terms of election organizers inefficient and ineffective as their core responsibilities of organizing the election are condensed into only two years of active work,” Justice Arief emphasized.

Voter Fatigue and Fragmented Focus

From the voters’ perspective, the Court considered that the close timing of national and regional elections could lead to voter fatigue. Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra noted that voters are overwhelmed when required to select among many candidates simultaneously using the five-box system, often within a limited timeframe.

“This fragmentation of voter focus on an overwhelming number of candidates at the same time renders the selection period very limited. This condition, whether consciously realized or not, ultimately degrades the quality of democratic participation,” he emphasized.

Timing of National and Local Elections

Regarding the timing between national and local elections, the Court acknowledged it could not specify an exact interval. However, it held that a reasonable gap, closely tied to technical arrangements, must be observed.

According to the Court, the national election (for DPR, DPD, and President/Vice President) shall be held first, followed by local elections (for DPRD and regional heads) within a minimum of two years and a maximum of two years and six months after the inauguration of the DPR and DPD or the President/Vice President.

Transitional Arrangements

The Court also stated that transitional arrangements, including the term limits of regional heads elected on November 27, 2024 and DPRD members elected on February 14, 2024, fall within the jurisdiction of lawmakers.

Such transitional arrangements must be regulated through constitutional engineering by legislators, including the formulation of norms related to the term of office for provincial/regency/city DPRD members and regional heads, based on principles of transitional norm formulation.

Court Partially Grants Petition

In its ruling, the Court declared Article 167 paragraph (3) of the Election Law conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding unless interpreted to mean: “Voting shall be conducted simultaneously to elect members of the DPR, DPD, and President/Vice President, and subsequently, within a minimum of two years and a maximum of two years and six months from the inauguration of the DPR and DPD or the President/Vice President, voting shall be conducted simultaneously to elect members of provincial and regency/city DPRD and governors/vice governors, regents/vice regents, and mayors/vice mayors, on a national public holiday or a day declared a national holiday.”

Additionally, the Court ruled that Article 347 paragraph (1) of the Election Law is conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding unless interpreted with the same meaning stated above.

“[The Court] found Article 3 paragraph (1) of Law No. 8 of 2015 on the Amendment to Law No. 1 of 2015 on the Stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors into Law (State Gazette No. 57 of 2015, Supplement to the State Gazette No. 5678) conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding unless interpreted to mean: ‘Elections shall be held simultaneously across the territory of the Republic of Indonesia to elect members of provincial and regency/city Regional Legislative Council and governors/vice governors, regents/vice regents, and mayors/vice mayors within a minimum of two years and a maximum of two years and six months since the inauguration of the House of Representatives and Regional Representatives Council or the President/Vice President,” pronounced Chief Justice Suhartoyo reading the Court’s verdict.

Also read:

Perludem: Five-Box Simultaneous Election Undermines Political Parties

Perludem Affirms Argument Against Five-Box Simultaneous Election

House to Evaluate 2024 Simultaneous Election 

Expert: Election System Must Be Able to Create Effective Government

The case No. 135/PUU-XXII/2024 was filed by the Association for Elections and Democracy (Perludem). It challenges Article 1 paragraph (1), Article 167 paragraph (3), Article 347 paragraph (1) of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections and Article 3 paragraph (1) of Law No. 8 of 2015 on the Regional Election (Pilkada) Law.

At the preliminary hearing on Friday, October 4, the Petitioner through its legal counsels argued that the five-box simultaneous election undermines the political party system and its simplification as well as the people’s sovereignty in elections. It stated that the simultaneity of the legislative and presidential election cannot be viewed as merely a scheduling or technical issue and the implementation of legislation.

In addition, election schedules would seriously impact the implementation of all election principles under Article 22E paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution as well as the independence and professionalism of election implementation under Article 22E paragraph (5). The Petitioner believes these provisions stipulate that the presidential, DPR (House of Representatives), DPD (Regional Representatives Council), and provincial and regency/city DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) election be simultaneous. As a result, parties have become powerless in the face of political reality when candidates who possess wealth, are popular, and have a lot of material could transactionally and tactically be nominated because the parties no longer have the opportunity and energy to carry out regeneration in nominating legislative members at all levels simultaneously.

Author         : Lulu Anjarsari P.
Editor          : A. Dodi Haryadi
PR               : Raisa Ayuditha M.
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.

---