Judge MK Silang's Opinion in the Presidential and Vice-Presidential Minimum Age Ruling

The Constitutional Court (MK) announced Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 regarding the minimum age limit for presidential and vice-presidential candidates on Monday (16/10/2023).

The decision was made in response to a lawsuit filed by Almas Tsaqibbirru, a law student at the University of Surakarta (UNSA).

Previously, Article 169 (q) of Law No. 7 of 2017 stipulated that a requirement for becoming a presidential or vice-presidential candidate was, "To be at least 40 (forty) years old."

Then, in its ruling, Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 changed the wording of the article to, "To be at least 40 (forty) years old or to have held/be currently holding a position elected through a general election, including regional head elections."

Although the minimum age limit remains unchanged, the MK's decision paves the way for younger presidential and vice-presidential candidates, provided they have previously held a public office elected through a general election, including regional heads.

Differing Opinions Among MK Judges

The ruling in Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 was not unanimously agreed upon by the Constitutional Court judges.

"Regarding the *a quo* Court's decision, there are concurring opinions from 2 (two) Constitutional Court judges, and there are also dissenting opinions from 4 (four) Constitutional Court judges," wrote the MK in the decision.

Of the 9 Constitutional Court judges who presided over this case, the two who expressed concurring opinions were:

1. Constitutional Court Justice Enny Nurbaningsih (Member)
2. Constitutional Court Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh (Member)

Then, the four who expressed dissenting opinions were:

1. Constitutional Court Justice Wahiduddin Adams (Member)
2. Constitutional Court Justice Saldi Isra (Member)
3. Constitutional Court Justice Arief Hidayat (Member)
4. Constitutional Court Justice Suhartoyo (Member)

According to Ahmad Basarah, Deputy Chairperson of the Indonesian People's Consultative Assembly (MPR RI), this indicates that only three Constitutional Court judges agreed with the ruling in Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023. Those three are:

1. Constitutional Court Justice Anwar Usman (Chief Justice and Member)
2. Constitutional Court Justice M. Guntur Hamzah (Member)
3. Constitutional Court Justice Manahan M.P. Sitompul (Member)

"This means that only 3 Constitutional Court judges actually agreed with this ruling. The remaining 6 Constitutional Court judges had differing opinions regarding the ruling. Therefore, the MK's decision did not actually grant the petitioner's request, but rather rejected it," said Ahmad Basarah in his press release on Tuesday (17/10/2023).

"Given such a problematic decision, it should not be immediately implemented because it contains problems, namely errors in making the decision that affect the validity of the decision. Therefore, the KPU (General Elections Commission) should prioritize the principles of caution, accuracy, and certainty in studying this decision," he continued.