ANALYSIS ON CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION NO. 96/PUU-XVIII/2020 FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF CRITICAL LEGAL STUDIES THEORY

Abstract

The establishment of the Constitutional Court is driven by a serious effort to protect the constitutional rights of citizens and uphold the constitution as the highest norm. Constitutional Court Decision No. 96/PUU-XVIII/2022 on the material review of Article 87 letters A and B of Law No. 7/2020 on the Constitutional Court, from the perspective of legal positivism, indicates that the Constitutional Court has exercised its authority in accordance with the governing law. Critical Legal Studies theory, as a branch of legal philosophy, offers a different perspective in evaluating legal products. This research aims to: first, understand the reasoning of the Constitutional Court judges in deciding the case; and second, assess the Constitutional Court's decision from the perspective of Critical Legal Studies theory. The research method employed is doctrinal research with a philosophical approach. The findings of this study reveal that the Constitutional Court ruled that the petitioner's argument concerning Article 87 letter A of Law 7/2020 is legally justified and no longer has binding legal force since the pronouncement of this Decision. However, the petitioner's request regarding Article 87 letter B of Law 7/2020 is deemed legally unjustified. According to the analysis of Critical Legal Studies theory on Constitutional Court Decision No. 96/PUU-XVII/2020, it is evident that there is a dominant ideology influencing the judges' considerations in the decision. The Constitutional Court merely relies on subjective values in deciding the case, disregarding procedural legal principles and pretending to maintain neutrality. The judges' reliance on political institution testimony demonstrates the inseparability of politics and law. The statement in the verdict regarding the selection of the Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson, who can only be reelected nine months after this decision, serves as evidence that the Constitutional Court aims to avoid any disadvantages and indirectly ensures the current Chairperson and Deputy Chairperson will continue to hold their positions.