Adam Imam Hamdana and Wianda Julita, the Petitioners, attending the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 10 of 2016 on Regional Heads, Thursday (11/13). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) granted the withdrawal of the petition in Case No. 88/PUU-XXIII/2025, which challenged the constitutionality of Article 7 paragraph (2) letter s of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors (Regional Election Law/Pilkada Law). The decision was delivered at a ruling hearing on Thursday, November 13, 2025.

“First, the Court grants the Petitioners’ withdrawal of the petition,” Chief Justice Suhartoyo announced in the plenary courtroom.

The Court had received the Petitioners’ letter of withdrawal on November 4, 2025. The following day, a panel hearing was held to confirm the revocation, which the Petitioners attended in person. During that hearing, they affirmed their intention to withdraw the case.

Based on this confirmation, the justices concluded during the justice deliberation meeting on November 6, 2025, that the withdrawal was legally justifiable. “Therefore, the Petitioners may no longer refile the a quo petition,” Suhartoyo added.

 

Also read:

Judicial Review on Legislators’ Pilkada Resignation Requirement Withdrawn

Petitioners Assert Legislative Candidates Resigning to Run for Regional Election Harms Democracy

Court Hears Case on Elected Legislative Candidates Resigning to Run for Regional Election

 

The petition had been filed by Wianda Julita Maharani and Adam Imam Hamdana, students of the Faculty of Sharia and Law at Sayyid Ali Rahmatullah Islamic State University. In their petition, they highlighted that the trend of legislators resigning shortly after inauguration to pursue pilkada candidacies poses risks to Indonesia’s democratic system.

They argued that the provision under review resulted in both actual and potential constitutional harm. As voters, they believed there was no guarantee that their electoral mandate would be upheld if legislators resigned early to join pilkada contests or to run in regions conducting repeat voting (PSU).

The Petitioners viewed the phenomenon as neglecting the people’s mandate and asserted that the article was inconsistent with the 1945 Constitution.

They suggested that restrictions should be introduced, such as prohibiting members of the DPR, DPD, and DPRD elected for the 2024–2029 term from participating in pilkada of the same period, as both offices run concurrently.

The Petitioners warned that without such limitations, the provision could dilute the principle of popular sovereignty, as newly elected legislators might serve only briefly before resigning. They also argued that the absence of restrictions may allow political parties to circumvent Constitutional Court Decision No. 176/PUU-XXII/2024 on party cadre development obligations.

In their petitum, they requested the Court to declare the phrase requiring a written resignation upon nomination unconstitutional and not legally binding unless interpreted to exclude those concurrently serving the same legislative term as the pilkada period, while permitting candidacy in subsequent pilkada after resignation.

For reference, Article 7 paragraph (2) letter s of the Pilkada Law states:
“Candidates for governor and deputy governor, regent and deputy regent, as well as mayor and deputy mayor as referred to in paragraph (1) must meet the following requirements: a…; b…; …; r…; s. submit a written resignation as a member of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Council, and the Regional Legislative Council as of the date of nomination as a candidate pair; t…; u….”
According to the Petitioners, this provision contradicts Article 1 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. (*)

Author: Mimi Kartika
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR: Fauzan Febriyan

Translator: Yuanna Sisilia

The full decision: Decision for Case No. 88/PUU-XXIII/2025 (in Bahasa Indonesia)

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.

 

---