Unshackled Indonesian court made pro-democracy ruling on presidential nominations possible: Analysts

Indonesia’s Constitutional Court was able to issue a judgment that opened the door for more inclusive presidential elections because it wasn’t under as much political pressure as before, analysts said.

However, several political parties have yet to take a stance on Thursday’s ruling, perhaps indicating they were surprised when the court abolished a regulation requiring parties to have a minimum number of votes or legislature seats to nominate a presidential candidate.

The court ruled 7-2 in favor of four separate student petitioners who questioned the legality of the regulation. 

Two judges dissented, saying the petitioners had no legal standing to pursue the case, a position that, if accepted, would have seen the case thrown out before being heard. 

One of the dissenters was Anwar Usman, Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka’s uncle. 

Anwar was removed as chief justice for ethical violations linked to an October 2023 Constitutional Court ruling that enabled Gibran to contest for the VP post.

For Hadar Nafis Gumay, executive director of a polls watchdog, the court’s decision represents a concrete hope that the next election will further democracy in Indonesia.

“Currently, the judges are very clear-minded, they have learned lessons but are also free to make decisions. In the past, political influences were strong enough to affect the Constitution, but not in this decision,” Hadar, with the Democracy and Integrity in Elections Foundation, told BenarNews.

“Indeed, the Constitutional Court cannot entirely break free from the influence of the ruling regime. [But] it has learned … it needed time and experience to witness the developments in the election, which eventually led to this judgment.”

For instance, the court, in its legal considerations, said it had observed that certain political parties always dominated the presidential elections – big parties being the obvious beneficiaries as they would have more seats.

Other democracy watchdogs had expressed concerns that the minimum seats or votes requirement would ultimately undermine governance and democracy. That’s because large coalitions would be formed, with parties aligning simply to reach the number required to nominate a presidential candidate.

Before the February 2024 general election, for instance, the eventual winner, Prabowo Subianto, led a disparate coalition whose members at the time represented 46% of the House of Representatives (DPR). After the election, that coalition has only expanded.

Titi Anggraini, a University of Indonesia lecturer, said the Constitutional Court had been watching these developments and ruled accordingly, which was a victory for the Indonesian voters rather than the parties.

“When the Constitutional Court carefully considered the dynamics and the needs of the administration, they determined that now is the right time for the [judgment],” she told BenarNews.

“This is a ruling that should be celebrated by everyone. We must appreciate the Constitutional Court for this decision.”

All political parties said they respected the Thursday ruling and agreed it was “final” – meaning it likely won’t be challenged. Indonesia’s legislature is now bound to revise the regulation in question before the next presidential election in 2029, analysts said. 

The government and all parties were bound by the court’s decision, and there was no recourse for further legal action, according to Yusril Ihza Mahendra, the coordinating minister for Law, Human Rights, Immigration, and Corrections.

As per the 1945 Constitution, “the Constitutional Court’s ruling is final and binding,” he said in a statement.

Analysts said the DPR must ensure it changes the presidential nomination regulation before the 2029 polls.

Iqbal Kholidin, a researcher from the Election and Democracy Association (PERLUDEM), said if all went well, the next presidential election would be broader and more inclusive.

“We hope that the Constitutional Court’s decision will be followed up by legislation, meaning it will be incorporated into the revised election law based on the Court’s ruling,” he told BenarNews.

”We hope that lawmakers will respect the court’s ruling.”

Last August, when the same court issued a similar ruling for regional elections, the then-legislature immediately drafted a bill that was set to reverse that judgment’s provisions.

The move brought to the streets thousands of angry Indonesians who feared for their democracy, causing lawmakers to swiftly drop the bill.

One constitutional law expert, Bivitri Susanti, said that not only must this legislature implement the ruling, it must do so transparently.

“The point is to make sure that the DPR doesn’t do it quietly. This must be monitored,” Bivitri, from the Jentera School of Law, told BenarNews.

“My assumption is that the DPR will definitely change it. … The last change was in 2017.”