Dian Amalia and Raden Nuh as petitioners presenting the revisions to their petition against Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections, Wednesday (4/1/2026). Photo by MKRI/Ilham W. M.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Raden Nuh and Dian Amalia were present at the follow-up hearing for the judicial review of Article 169 of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections on Wednesday, April 1, 2026. This second hearing for Case No. 81/PUU-XXIV/2026, held to examine the revisions to the Petitioners’ petition, was presided over by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra along with Constitutional Justices Ridwan Mansyur and Adies Kadir.

Raden Nuh explained that several parts of the petition had been revised, such as the Petitioners’ status as citizens who have a right to honest and fair elections. There were also changes to the constitutional benchmarks and the petitums, as well as explanation as to why the petition is not ne bis in idem or identical with previous petitions.

“The Petitioners request that the Court declare Article 169 of the Election Law contrary to the 1945 Constitution and not legally binding insofar as it is not interpreted as ‘the candidates for president and/or vice-president shall meet the requirements letters a through t as regulated under Article 169 and be free from blood or marital relationships with an incumbent president and/or vice president,’” said Raden Nuh reading the revised petitums.

Also read: Absence of Ban of Nepotistic Requisites for Presidential Tickets Questioned

At the preliminary hearing on Tuesday, March 3, the Petitioners stated that the norm stipulating the requirements to become a candidate for president and vice president is unconstitutional because the norm a quo does not mention any prohibition against nepotism or conflicts of interest in the requirements.

With the enactment of Article 169 of the Election Law without any requirement against nepotism, the Petitioners argue that their right to have presidential and vice-presidential candidates emerging from a fair and healthy competitive process has been diminished. The absence of such a requirement allegedly results in systemic injustice, thereby rendering the Petitioners’ voting rights substantively meaningless. Moreover, it may give rise to structural conflicts of interest that undermine the integrity of elections.

Accordingly, the Petitioners request that the Court declare Article 169 of the Election Law unconstitutional and not legally binding insofar as it is not interpreted to mean that the candidates for president and/or vice-president shall meet the requirements letters a through t as regulated under Article 169 and be free from blood or marital relationships with an incumbent president and/or vice president.

Explore case No. 81/PUU-XXIV/2026 (in Indonesian).

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : N. Rosi
PR            : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
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.

---