Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra delivering a lecture on “Procedural Law for Judicial Review of Laws Against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia” during the Technical Training on Judicial Review for Lawyers II, Fiscal Year 2025 that was held virtually on Wednesday (8/27/2025). Photo by MKRI/Ilham WM
JAKARTA (MKRI) – Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court (MK) Saldi Isra delivered a presentation on “Procedural Law for Judicial Review of Laws Against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia” during the Technical Training on Judicial Review for Lawyers II, Fiscal Year 2025, that conducted online on Wednesday, August 27, 2025.
Addressing the participating lawyers via Zoom, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi emphasized the importance of understanding the process of submitting a judicial review petition. He stressed that judicial review plays a vital role in constitutional governance. While Marbury against Madison in the early 19th century is often regarded as the starting point of judicial review, he noted that both the U.S. Federal Supreme Court and several State Supreme Courts had already reviewed legislation before that landmark case.
“Marbury against Madison was not actually the first case, but it became legendary because, for the first time, a Supreme Court or a top judicial body corrected an administrative action of the government and annulled it. That ruling is considered the initial step in the emergence of judicial review by the judiciary,” Deputy Chief Justice Saldi explained.
Deputy Chief Justice Saldi further pointed out that this cannot be separated from the concept of checks and balances among branches of power. Traditionally, the legislature makes laws, the executive enforces them, while the judiciary has the authority to assess the constitutionality of laws and the executive’s actions. “The function of judicial power, in this sense, is to act as the institution designed by the constitution to ensure checks and balances,” he said.
Deputy Chief Justice Saldi also highlighted the internal checks within the U.S. legislative process, between the House of Representatives and the Senate. If both chambers are controlled by the same party, the president (from a different party) still holds veto power. And if both the legislature and executive are dominated by the same party, the judiciary still retains the authority to review laws against the constitution.
Returning to Marbury against Madison, he noted that although the U.S. Federal Supreme Court’s decision was heavily criticized, it was later regarded by the justices as one of the Court’s most important rulings. From that point onward, judicial bodies with constitutional review authority came to be seen as guardians of the constitution. Unlike the U.S., countries with constitutional courts—such as Indonesia, South Korea, and Germany—derive their review powers directly from their constitutions.
He also stressed that the Court is often referred to as the “final interpreter” of the constitution. “In theory, anyone can interpret the constitution—our moderator, I myself, or other institutions—but constitutionally, in our system, this authority lies with the Constitutional Court. In the United States, it rests with the Supreme Court,” he said.
“Most importantly, the Court’s role is to safeguard and protect citizens’ constitutional rights. If lawmakers pass a law that a citizen believes violates their constitutional rights, the Court provides a space to contest and review such claims,” he emphasized.
He gave the example of India, where the Supreme Court once issued a landmark ruling affirming its authority to annul constitutional amendments if those amendments deviated from democratic principles. “In India’s system, if political powers attempt to alter the constitution in a way that undermines democracy, the Supreme Court can strike down the amendment,” he explained.
Deputy Chief Justice Saldi went on to describe Indonesia’s judicial design, where the Supreme Court (MA) and the Constitutional Court (MK) are separated. Following the 1945 Constitution’s amendments, constitutional review powers—along with other authorities—were explicitly assigned to the Constitutional Court to prevent overburdening the Supreme Court.
He outlined the Court’s four powers and one duty: judicial review of laws against the 1945 Constitution, resolving disputes between state institutions, deciding on the dissolution of political parties, resolving election result disputes, and ruling on Parliament’s allegations against the President and/or Vice President. “Some books describe this as four powers and one obligation, but I view all five as powers of the Court. All five are inherently connected to political processes, which is why the Court is often called a political court,” he explained.
He added that the nine Constitutional Court justices are appointed through a tripartite process: three nominated by Parliament, three by the President, and three by the Supreme Court—similar to Italy’s system, where 15 justices are appointed (five by parliament, five by the executive, and five by the Supreme Court of Italy).
Deputy Chief Justice Saldi also clarified that the Court’s Law does not provide detailed procedural rules, which is why the Court issues its own regulations. As a judicial institution, the Court is passive and only acts upon petitions filed. Anyone—not just licensed lawyers—can file a case.
“This sometimes prompts questions from lawyers: how can someone without a legal license represent themselves or others before the Court?” he noted. In hearings, the President and Parliament appear not as opposing parties but as institutions providing testimony regarding the challenged law.
Deputy Chief Justice Saldi then walked participants through the judicial review process, from registration to the final ruling. He explained that cases before the Court are referred to as “petitions” rather than “disputes,” since petitioners are not litigating against an opposing party. The President and Parliament’s role in hearings is solely to provide explanations, as they are the lawmaking bodies.
Penulis: Ilham W.M.
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari P.
Author : Ilham W.M.
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
Translator : Jessica Rivena Meilania/SO
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.
Thursday, August 28, 2025 | 11:15 WIB 177