A Legal Analysis of the Separation of National and Regional Elections Following Constitutional Court Decision Number 135/PUU-XXII/2024

Abstract

Elections in the reform era began to undergo many changes, from elections being postponed from 2002 to 1999 due to the urgency of an executive vacuum, to the 2009 elections, which underwent systemic changes in their implementation. In addition, the 2019 and 2024 elections were changed to be held simultaneously. These dynamics have actually given rise to new conflicts and issues regarding the authority of the Constitutional Court. The regulations on this new model have created legal inconsistencies between the state constitution and the election law. he constitution mandates that elections be held every five years. However, there will be an extension of the term of office for regional heads until 2031. The purpose of this research is to identify and analyze the shift in the role of the Constitutional Court in adjudicating cases and the impact of this shift. The research method used is normative legal analysis with a regulatory approach and prescriptive analysis based on primary and secondary legal sources. The conclusion is that the shift in the role of the Constitutional Court from a negative legislator to a positive legislator is contrary to the Constitutional Court Law and has the potential to disrupt relations between institutions. This has an impact on the term of office of regional heads and the extension of their term of office or leadership vacancies in the regions and opens up the possibility of financial conflicts in appointing temporary regional heads.