politic

Political Parties Oppose MK's Decision On Election Separation

Political parties are all opposing the Constitutional Court's (MK) decision on the separation of regional and national elections. All political parties are consolidating their stance on the decision. The majority of parties oppose the decision. This is because the Constitutional Court's decision is considered to be unconstitutional because it violates the 1945 Constitution. The Head of the PKB Faction in the MPR, Neng Eem Marhamah Zulfa Hiz, is of the view that the 1944 Constitution is the highest constitution in Indonesia. Therefore, according to her, every law or legal regulation below it must be in accordance with the 1945 Constitution. 

"Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution, paragraph 1, clearly states that elections are held in a LUBER manner every five years. Paragraph 2 also states that elections are held to elect members of the DPR, DPD, President and Vice President, and DPRD, so the legal basis is clear. There must be no regulations that are inconsistent with this," she said in Jakarta, Monday (7/7). The Deputy Secretary General of the PKB DPP also said that one of the tasks of the MPR is to absorb the aspirations of the people, especially related to the implementation of the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, the PKB considers that the Constitutional Court's decision is not in accordance with the 1945 Constitution. "Currently, the PKB MPR Faction is still studying the Constitutional Court's decision which is considered not in accordance with the 1945 Constitution, therefore this decision needs to be followed up so that a constitutional crisis does not occur," said Eem. On the other hand, Politician and Nasdem legislator, Rifqinizamy Karsayuda, considered that the Constitutional Court (MK) had lowered its quality after issuing a decision related to the separation of the national and local election schedules. He said that the Constitutional Court's task should only be to the point of assessing a legal norm regarding whether it is constitutional or unconstitutional, so that it does not form a certain norm. "The Court downgraded itself from being able to only assess one norm of law against the constitution, whether it is constitutional or unconstitutional, to being a court that forms norms," ??he said at the Parliament Complex, Senayan, Central Jakarta, Monday (7/7/2025). In fact, he said, the DPR actually has the authority to form laws or norms, because it has an open legal policy context. "Then [the Constitutional Court] took over in quotation marks our constitutional duties, the President and the DPR, to form norms," ??he said. For that, this Nasdem legislator emphasized that as a member of the Nasdem Faction he wanted to uphold the principles of constitutionality. Furthermore, Rifqi also emphasized that the NasDem party's stance on the Constitutional Court's decision is that if it is followed up, it is part of a violation of the constitution itself. In his understanding, he added, in the context of the theory of state data law and constitutional law, the Constitutional Court's decision is final and binding. Therefore, he views that if there is another judicial review (JR), then the Constitutional Court's decision will not be final and binding. "And that is now our criticism of the Constitutional Court. The same object can be decided many times with different decisions," he said.  

Tag: LUBER MK Political Parties