ANALYSIS OF CONSTITUTIONAL COURT VERDICT NUMBER 14/PUU-XI/2013 ON THE PRESIDENTIAL THRESHOLD

Suparto Suparto

doi:10.20884/1.jdh.2016.16.3.523

Abstract

In judicial review on Article 9 of Law No. 42 of 2008 on Election of President and Vice-President which regulates presidential threshold, the Constitutional Court declined it since it is an open legal policy mandated by Article 6 paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution that the administration of President and Vice-President election will be further regulated in a Law. This reason is deemed insufficient as the Article 6 paragraph (5) regulates procedures (phases of the process), not requirements for candidates of President and Vice President to be eligible on participating in the election. Moreover, Article 9 of Law No. 42 of 2008 potentially expands the norms as stipulated in Article 6A paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution in which the candidates for President and Vice President shall be nominated by a political party or coalition of political parties participating in the election prior to the election without any other frills (the threshold).The term presidential threshold that is being used up until now is actually incorrect term; instead, presidential candidacy threshold should be considered as the more appropriate term.Keywords: Presidential Election, Presidential threshold, Constitutional Court Verdict.

Highlights

The implementation of the President andVice President direct election is arguably more democratic than the President and Vice President appointment by People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) since the implementation mechanisms directly involves people which assumes the President and Vice President received a direct mandate and real support as a form of direct interaction between the elector and the elected
In decision Number 14/PUU-XI/2013 concerning Testing on Law Number 42 Year 2008 regarding to President and Vice President General Election, the Constitutional Court has decided that president and vice president election with legislative election are conducted simultaneously
The author who disagrees with the Constitutional Court considers that the presidential threshold is a legal policy of law maker

Summary

Introduction

Vice President direct election is arguably more democratic than the President and Vice President appointment by People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) since the implementation mechanisms directly involves people which assumes the President and Vice President received a direct mandate and real support as a form of direct interaction between the elector and the elected. Vol 16 No 3, September 2016 cording to the pretension of the majority; second, to maintain the stability of government in accordance with applicable presidential system It makes sense if the people expect the election of President and Vice President to create a democratic state government and free from authoritarian ruler based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution as well as to build people's sovereignty completely.[1]. Separation of the electoral system, both nationally and locally, the executive and legislative branches are considered less effective and efficient in a presidential system It causes a lot of conflicts among groups or individuals as well as the impact on the efficient use of state budget related to the implementation of the election.[2]. A civil society coalition for the elections represented by Effendi

42 Year 2008 on President and Vice President

Findings

Discussion

Conclusion