Abstract

This study examines the Dynamics of Constitutional Injury Interpretation by the Constitutional Court in the Judicial Review of the Presidential Threshold Law, focusing on how the Court’s interpretation of constitutional harm has shifted in relation to granting legal standing to individual applicants. Historically, individual citizens have held the right to challenge laws they believe infringe on their constitutional rights. However, recent rulings show a shift where the Court restricts legal standing, allowing only political parties to challenge the Presidential Threshold Law. This restriction is based on two main reasons: changes in the electoral system, which now directly involves political parties, and the notion that voters’ increased knowledge diminishes the need for individual challenges. The study aims to critically assess whether these reasons hold sufficient weight to limit individual participation. Through a normative legal approach utilizing case and statutory analysis, findings reveal that limiting individual participation undermines democratic legitimacy, as the cited reasons lack substantive grounds to justify the restriction on individual legal standing in the constitutional review process.

There is no Figure or data content available for this article

References

• Ajie, Radita. “Batasan Pilihan Kebijakan Pembentuk Undang-Undang (Open Legal Policy) Dalam Pembentukan Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Berdasarkan Tafsir Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Jurnal Legislasi Indonesia 13, no. 2 (May 4, 2018): 111–120.

  Arsil, Fitra, and Qurrata Ayuni. “Kedudukan Hukum Khusus Dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang Di Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Jurnal Konstitusi 19, no. 3 (November 30, 2022): 957–980.

  Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Hukum Tata Negara Darurat. Jakarta: PT. Raja Grafindo Persada, 2007.

  Bickel, Alexander M. The Least Dangerous Branch: The Supreme Court at the Bar of Politics. Yale University Press, 1986.

  Bisariyadi, Bisariyadi. “Membedah Doktrin Kerugian Konstitusional.” Jurnal Konstitusi 14, no. 1 (2017): 22–44. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://www.neliti.com/id/publications/114619/

  Black, Black, Henry Campbell, Garner Garner, and Bryan A. Black’s Law Dictionary. 9th ed. New York: West, 2009.

  Bonvin, Jean-Michel, and Francesco Laruffa. “Deliberative Democracy in the Real World, the Contribution of the Capability Approach.” International Review of Sociology 28, no. 2 (May 4, 2018): 216–233. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2018.1477101

  Chemerinsky, Erwin. Worse Than Nothing: The Dangerous Fallacy of Originalism. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2022.

  Cohen, Eshed. “The Jurisdiction of the Constitutional Court.” Constitutional Court Review 11, no. 1 (January 2021): 1–49. Accessed July 13, 2024. https://journals.co.za/doi/full/10.2989/CCR.2021.0016

  Epstein, Lee. “Some Thoughts on the Study of Judicial Behavior.” William & Mary Law Review 57, no. 6 (2016): 2019–2070.

  Fletcher, William A. “The Structure of Standing.” The Yale Law Journal 98, no. 2 (1988): 221–291. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://www.jstor.org/stable/796702

  Fuadi, Abdul. “Politik Hukum Pengaturan Keserentakan Pemilu.” Jurnal Konstitusi 18, no. 3 (February 15, 2022): 702–715.

  Ghoffar, Abdul. “Problematika Presidential Threshold: Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Pengalaman di Negara Lain.” Jurnal Konstitusi 15, no. 3 (2018): 480–501. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://www.neliti.com/id/publications/267422/

  Gienapp, Jonathan. “Written Constitutionalism, Past and Present.” Law and History Review 39, no. 2 (May 2021): 321–360. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/law-and-history-review/article/abs /written-constitutionalism-past-and present/53E0428BC8926DAEACC991AE153A4BF7

  Goelzhauser, Greg. “Avoiding Constitutional Cases.” American Politics Research 39, no. 3 (May 1, 2011): 483–511. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1177/1532673X10388144

  Green, Leslie. Law and the Role of a Judge. In: Ferzan KK, Morse SJ (Eds) Legal, Moral, and Metaphysical Truths: The Philosophy of Michael S. Moore. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2016.

  Hammond, Marit. “Deliberative Democracy as a Critical Theory.” Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy 22, no. 7 (November 10, 2019): 787–808. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/13698230.2018.1438333.

  Hamzah, Herdiansyah. “The Constitutional Interpretation on the Natural Resource: Originalist Vs Non-Originalist Interpretation.” Hasanuddin Law Review 5, no. 3 (March 4, 2020): 299.

  Hendrianto, Stefanus. Law and Politics of Constitutional Courts: Indonesia and the Search for Judicial Heroes. London: Routledge, 2018.

  Hofer, Scott, and Susan Achury. “The Consequences of Diversifying the US District Courts: Race, Gender, and Ideological Alignment through Judicial Appointments.” The Justice System Journal 42, no. 3/4 (2021): 306–324. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://www.jstor.org/stable/27224784

  International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance. The Global State of Democracy 2019: Addressing the Ills, Reviving the Promise. Sweden: International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, 2019. Accessed July 13, 2024. https://www.idea.int/publications/catalogue/global-state-of-democracy-2019

  Irwansyah, Irwansyah. Penelitian Hukum: Pilihan Metode Dan Praktik Penulisan Artikel (Edisi Revisi). 5th ed. Vol. 3. 123. Yogyakarta: Mirra Buana Media, 2022.

  Leiter, Brian. “The Roles of Judges in Democracies: A Realistic View.” In Judges and Adjudication in Constitutional Democracies: A View from Legal Realism, edited by Pierluigi Chiassoni and Bojan Spaić, 135:7–34. Law and Philosophy Library. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2021. Accessed January 26, 2025. http://link.springer.com/10.1007/978-3-030-58186-2_2

  Martínez Rojas, David. “The Normative Underpinnings of Democracy and the Balance between Morality and Legitimacy.” International Journal of Philosophical Studies 28, no. 1 (January 1, 2020): 1–17. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/09672559.2019.1616801

  Masthead, Masthead. “UC Law Journal | Law Journals | UC Law SF.” UC Law SF Scholarship Repository. Last modified March 2024. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://repository.uclawsf.edu/hastings_law_journal/?utm_source=repository.uchastings.edu%2Fhastings_law_journal%2Fvol62%2Fiss3%2F3&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

  Mello, Eduardo, and Matias Spektor. “Brazil: The Costs of Multiparty Presidentialism.” Journal of Democracy 29, no. 2 (2018): 113–127. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://muse.jhu.edu/pub/1/article/690080

  Melton, James, and Tom Ginsburg. “Does De Jure Judicial Independence Really Matter?: A Reevaluation of Explanations for Judicial Independence.” Journal of Law and Courts 2, no. 2 (2014): 187–271.

  Musella, Fortunato, and Luigi Rullo. “Constitutional Courts in Turbulent Times.” European Politics and Society 25, no. 3 (May 26, 2024): 461–467. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/23745118.2023.2244394

  Pfander, James E. “Uncontested Adjudication and Standing to Sue.” In Cases Without Controversies: Uncontested Adjudication in Article III Courts, edited by James E. Pfander, 0. Oxford University Press, 2021. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1093/oso/9780197571408.003.0011

  Roux, Theunis. “Constitutional Courts as Democratic Consolidators: Insights from South Africa after 20 Years.” Journal of Southern African Studies 42, no. 1 (January 2, 2016): 5–18. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057070.2016.1084770

  Schmidt, Thomas P. “Standing Between Private Parties.” SSRN Scholarly Paper. Rochester, NY, December 22, 2023. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://papers.ssrn.com/abstract=4673895

  Seyla, Benhabib. Democracy and Difference: Contesting the Boundaries of the Political. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021.

  Siahaan, Marurar. Hukum Acara Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia. 2nd ed. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2015.

  Smith, B. C. Judges and Democratization: Judicial Independence in New Democracies. Vol. 2. London: Routledge, 2022.

  Smith, Steven S., and Hong Min Park. “Americans’ Attitudes About the Senate Filibuster.” American Politics Research 41, no. 5 (September 2013): 735–760. Accessed July 13, 2024. http://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/1532673X13475472

  Snijders, Thom. “Virtuous Judges, Politicisation, and Decision-Making in the Judicialized Legal Landscape.” Legal Ethics 26, no. 1 (January 2, 2023): 46–73. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/1460728x.2023.2235183

  Sukmawan, Denny Indra, and Syaugi Pratama. “Critical Review of the Constitutional Court’s Decision on the Presidential Threshold:” Jurnal Konstitusi 20, no. 4 (December 1, 2023): 556–575. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://jurnalkonstitusi.mkri.id/index.php/jk/article/view/2108

  Sunstein, Cass. Constitutional Personae. New York: Oxford University Press, 2015.

  Wicaksono, Dian Agung, and Enny Nurbaningsih. “Ratio Legis Penetapan Pembayar Pajak (Taxpayer) sebagai Kedudukan Hukum dalam Pengujian Undang-Undang oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Jurnal Konstitusi 17, no. 3 (November 10, 2020): 461–494. Accessed July 13, 2024. http://localhost/index.php/jk/article/view/1731

  Yusa, I Gede, Komang Pradnyana Sudibya, Nyoman Mas Aryani, and Bagus Hermanto. “Gagasan Pemberian Legal Standing Bagi Warga Negara Asing dalam Constitutional Review.” Jurnal Konstitusi 15, no. 4 (January 15, 2019): 752–773. Accessed July 14, 2024. http://ejournal.mahkamahkonstitusi.go.id/index.php/jk/article/view/1544

  Zschirnt, Simon. “Gay Rights, the New Judicial Federalism, and State Supreme Courts: Disentangling the Effects of Ideology and Judicial Independence.” Justice System Journal 37, no. 4 (October 1, 2016): 348–366. Accessed July 14, 2024. https://doi.org/10.1080/0098261X.2016.1153988

How to Cite This

Article Metrics

Download Statistics

Other Statistics

Copyright and Permissions

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with Kosmik Hukum agree to the following terms:

1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.

Data Availability