The Application of Judicial Activism in the Constitutional Court Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 Regarding the Age Requirements for Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates in Relation to the Theory of Legal Purpose

Abin Rifa Aldani; Ali Abdurrahman; Lailani Sungkar

doi:10.31599/krtha.v18i3.3231

Authors

Abin Rifa Aldani Universitas Padjadjaran
Ali Abdurrahman Universitas Padjadjaran
Lailani Sungkar Universitas Padjadjaran

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31599/krtha.v18i3.3231

Keywords:

Judicial Activism, Decision MK 90/PUU-XXI/2023, Theory of Legal Purpose

Abstract

The Constitutional Court's decision 90/PUU-XXI/2023 has sparked controversy in society, as it is seen as exceeding its authority or encroaching on legislative powers, commonly referred to as open legal policy. The application of judicial activism in this decision has raised many questions, leading to polarization ahead of the 2024 Presidential Election. The aim of this research is to examine the application of judicial activism in the Constitutional Court's decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 in relation to the theory of legal objectives. The methodology used in this study is normative legal methodology, utilizing various legal sources found in literature related to judicial activism in the Constitutional Court's decision 90/PUU-XXI/2023 regarding the age requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates, linked to the theory of legal objectives and the doctrine of legal activism, which are discussed and evaluated. The research findings indicate that the application of judicial activism in the Constitutional Court's decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 is an inappropriate step that does not adequately consider the principle of virtue jurisprudence. Furthermore, the application of judicial activism in Decision 90/PUU-XXI/2023 does not fulfill the principles of legal objectives, which prioritize justice, followed by utility and certainty.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Afdhali, D. R., & Syahuri, T. (n.d.). Idealitas Penegakan, Hal 555-561. In COLLEGIUM STUDIOSUM JOURNAL (Vol. 6, Issue 2).

Aharon Barok. (2006). The Judge in a Democracy. Princeton University Press.

Arrasuli, B. K., & Nadhilah, Y. (2023). Praktik Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dikaitkan dengan Prinsip Pemisahan Kekuasaan. 6(1). https://doi.org/10.31933/unesrev.v6i1

Christopher G. Buck. (2007). Judicial Activism. Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice.

Elva Imeldatur Rohmah, Z. I. (2024). Dinamika Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023 Tentang Persyaratan Usia Calon Presiden dan Wakil Presiden. Progresif Jurnal Ilmu Hukum, 8(1).

Faiz, P. M. (n.d.). Dimensi Judicial Activism dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Dimensions of Judicial Activism In The Constitutional Court Decisions. http://ssrn.com/abstract=2847500

Hirschl, R. (n.d.). Constitutional Courts vs. Religious Fundamentalism: Three Middle Eastern Tales.

http://www.knesset.gov.il/laws/special/eng/basic3_eng.htm

Jimly Asshiddiqie. (2004). Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Pengujian Undang-Undang. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 27(11).

Judicial activism. (2017). In Judges and Democratization (pp. 159–182). Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315544847-9

Mohammad Agus Maulidi. (2017). “Problematika Hukum Implementasi Putusan Final Dan Mengikat Mahkamah Konstitusi Perspektif Negara Hukum. Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum, 24(4).

Novitalia, K. H. B. A. (2024). KREDIBILITAS MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI PASCA PUTUSAN MK NOMOR: 90/PUU-XXI/2023. Jurnal Solusi, 22(1).

Rasji, A. A. F. J. (2024). Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/PUU/XXI/2023 Tentang Persyaratan Batas Usia Pencalonan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden. JLEB: Journal of Law Education and Business, 2(2).

Rodríguez-Garavito, C. (2011). Beyond the Courtroom: The Impact of Judicial Activism on Socioeconomic Rights in Latin America. Texas Law Review, 89.

Wibisana, A. G. (2019). MENULIS DI JURNAL HUKUM: GAGASAN, STRUKTUR, DAN GAYA. Jurnal Hukum & Pembangunan, 49(2), 471. https://doi.org/10.21143/jhp.vol49.no2.2014

William P. Marshall. (2002). Conservatives and the Seven Sins of Judicial Activism. University of Colorado Law Review, 73(4).