Pembatasan Yudisial dan Perluasan Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam Memutus Sengketa Hasil Pilkada

Abstract

The Constitutional Court in Decision Number 85/PUU-XX/2022 stated that the authority to settle regional head election result dispute is the Constitutional Court’s original authority. This decision represents a shift from the Court’s position in Decision Number 97/PUU-XI/2013, which stated that the Court’s authority to settle regional head election result disputes is transitional. The purpose of this study is to examine Decision Number 85/PUU-XX/2022 according to the concept of judicial restraint. This is a juridical-normative research, employing statutory, case, conceptual, and historical approaches. The data used are primary and secondary legal materials. The findings of the study point to two major conclusions. First, there is a dynamic in the regulation of the authority to decide regional head election result dispute. This dynamic occurs as a result of the Court’s inconsistent interpretation of the position of regional head elections in the electoral regime, the Court’s authority, and the extent of legislators’ lawmaking authority. Second, from the standpoint of judicial restraint, the Constitutional Court Decision Number 85/PUU-XX/2022 cannot be justified because of three main considerations: (1) the constitutional limits of Court’s authority based on textual, grammatical, and historical interpretations; (2) the ambiguity and variability of interpretations of the Court’s authorities under the 1945 Constitution; and (3) separation of powers and institutional limitations of the Constitutional Court.