Junior Legal Analyst Amriansyah Maulana of the Constitutional Court receives a visit from the Executive Board of the Law Faculty Student Body (BEM FH) of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University (Untirta) on Monday (11/17/2025). Photo by MKRI/Fauzan.

---

JAKARTA, (MKRI) – The Constitutional Court (the Court) received a visit from the Executive Board of the Law Faculty Student Body (BEM FH) of Sultan Ageng Tirtayasa University (Untirta) on Monday (11/17/2025). The delegation was welcomed by Junior Legal Analyst Amriansyah Maulana in the Auditorium of Building I of the Court.

In his presentation, Amriansyah—known as Amri—explained the long history of judicial review practices around the world. He noted that the tradition of judicial review dates back to 1803 in the United States through the landmark case Marbury v. Madison. According to him, this ruling became a crucial milestone because at that time the U.S. Supreme Court did not yet have explicit constitutional authority to review the legality of statutes.

“Marbury v. Madison is fascinating because it marks the beginning of the judiciary’s strengthened role in assessing the constitutionality of laws, even when the incumbent president was in an unfavorable political position,” Amri said.

Beyond the United States, Amri also discussed the Austrian model of the Constitutional Court introduced by Hans Kelsen in the early 20th century. Austria, he explained, became the pioneer of the modern constitutional court, a model later adopted by many countries, including Indonesia. “Every country develops its own system of judicial review, but the core principle remains the same: ensuring that the constitution stands as the highest law,” he said.

Amri then outlined the early ideas surrounding the establishment of a judicial review body in Indonesia. During the BPUPKI deliberations, Muhammad Yamin proposed the establishment of the Balai Agung, a court empowered to compare statutes with the Constitution. However, the idea was rejected by Soepomo because the 1945 Constitution at that time was not drafted based on the trias politica doctrine that separates governmental powers into the executive, legislative, and judicial branches.

“At that time, Indonesia’s constitutional structure did not yet reflect a clear separation of powers, so the idea of creating a judicial review body could not take shape,” Amri explained.

He added that prior to the amendments to the 1945 Constitution, Indonesia’s constitutional system was heavily influenced by the notion that sovereignty rested in the hands of the people and was fully exercised by the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR), making it the highest state institution. “After the amendments, the state structure changed. There is no longer a highest state institution. What exists now are high state institutions with equal standing, reflecting the application of trias politica,” he said.

According to Amri, the need for a judicial review institution became increasingly apparent after the constitutional amendments, ultimately leading to the establishment of the Constitutional Court. “The Court was created because many laws at the time were considered problematic and inconsistent with the Constitution,” he said.

Amri continued by explaining the Court’s crucial constitutional mandate, which includes reviewing statutes against the 1945 Constitution, resolving disputes over constitutional authority among state institutions, adjudicating electoral disputes, deciding on the dissolution of political parties, and ruling on the House of Representatives’ (DPR) accusation of legal violations by the President or Vice President.

He concluded by describing the Court’s institutional structure, known for its nine-pillar representation. The nine constitutional justices are nominated by three different institutions—three by the DPR, three by the President, and three by the Supreme Court. This composition, he said, is intended to maintain balanced representation and ensure the Court’s independence as the guardian of the Constitution.

Amri also emphasized that the Court is regarded as a modern and trusted institution within Indonesia’s judicial system. Numerous institutions conduct study visits to the Court, especially on judicial technology development and courtroom governance. As an institution committed to ensuring access to justice, the Court continues to expand inclusive public services, including online submissions, virtual hearings, and digital information access.(*)

Author             : Utami Argawati

Editor              : N. Rosi.

Translator       : Aski Violeta Rumere/Agusweka Poltak Siregar

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 prevails.

---