The Petitioners at the ruling hearing for Case No. 81/PUU-XXIV/2026 on the material review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections, Thursday (4/16/2026). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court has ruled to dismiss the petition for the material review of Article 169 of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections filed by Raden Nuh and Dian Amalia. The ruling hearing for Decision No. 81/PUU-XXIV/2026 took place on Thursday, April 16, 2026.

“The Court hereby declares the Petitioners’ petition inadmissible,” Chief Justice Suhartoyo stressed, while delivering the verdict for the case alongside the other eight constitutional justices in the plenary courtroom.

Delivering the Court’s legal considerations, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra stated that after reviewing the petition, especially the second petitum, on the on hand, the Petitioners asked that Article 169 of Law No. 7 of 2017 be declared conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding. On the other hand, they requested that letters a through t of the article remain in full but added with the phrase “the candidates for president and/or vice-president shall meet the requirements letters a through t.”

Such a request—where the Petitioners asked that the article be interpreted to require candidates for president and/or vice-president to be free from blood or marital relationships with an incumbent president and/or vice president—is ambiguous, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra stated.

“Within reasonable reasoning, the Court cannot grant a petitum formulated in mutually contradictory terms. Based on the facts and legal considerations of the petition, the Court has no doubt in declaring that the Petitioners’ petition is unclear or vague,” he stressed.

Also read:

Absence of Ban of Nepotistic Requisites for Presidential Tickets Questioned

Petitioners Affirm Petitums to Ban Nepotistic Practices in Presidential Candidacy

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 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.”

Read Decision 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.

---