Konstitusionalitas Ketentuan Syarat Usia Calon Kepala Daerah: Telaah atas Putusan MA Nomor 23 P/Hum/2024 dan Putusan MK Nomor 70/PUU-XXII/2024

Aysiasyifaa Nikmaratu Azzahrani; Lukman Santoso

doi:10.71094/simpul.v2i3.509

Authors

Aysiasyifaa Nikmaratu Azzahrani Faculty of Sharia, UIN Kiai Ageng Muhammad Besari Ponorogo, Ponorogo, Indonesia Author
Lukman Santoso Faculty of Sharia, UIN Kiai Ageng Muhammad Besari Ponorogo, Ponorogo, Indonesia Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.71094/simpul.v2i3.509

Keywords:

Supreme Court, Constitutional Court, Regional Head Election, Age Requirement, Procedural Democracy

Abstract

This article examines the constitutional and procedural implications of the minimum-age requirement for regional head candidates by comparing Supreme Court Decision No. 23 P/HUM/2024 and Constitutional Court Decision No. 70/PUU-XXII/2024. Using normative legal research with statutory, case, and conceptual approaches, the study reconstructs the ratio decidendi of both decisions and evaluates them through procedural democracy, distributive justice, legal certainty, and judicial-competence parameters. The analysis shows that the Supreme Court shifted the age-calculation point to the inauguration of elected candidates, thereby allowing eligibility to remain contingent during the nomination and electoral stages. By contrast, although the Constitutional Court rejected the petition, its legal reasoning affirmed that all candidacy requirements must be fulfilled before the electoral commission determines candidate pairs. The latter interpretation provides stronger procedural finality because candidate eligibility is verified before electoral competition begins and is applied at the same temporal point to all candidates. The article argues that the core issue is not merely the numerical age threshold, but the institutional authority and temporal design of eligibility verification. Legislative clarification is therefore necessary to prevent recurring interpretive conflict and strengthen legal certainty in regional elections.

References

[1] Republik Indonesia, Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.

[2] J. Asshiddiqie, Konstitusi dan Konstitusionalisme Indonesia. Jakarta: Sinar Grafika, 2014.

[3] J. Asshiddiqie, Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Tata Negara. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada, 2009.

[4] Republik Indonesia, Undang-Undang Nomor 10 Tahun 2016 tentang Perubahan Kedua atas Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 tentang Penetapan Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati, dan Walikota Menjadi Undang-Undang.

[5] Komisi Pemilihan Umum Republik Indonesia, Peraturan Komisi Pemilihan Umum Nomor 9 Tahun 2020 tentang Perubahan Keempat atas Peraturan Komisi Pemilihan Umum Nomor 3 Tahun 2017 tentang Pencalonan Pemilihan Gubernur dan Wakil Gubernur, Bupati dan Wakil Bupati, dan/atau Wali Kota dan Wakil Wali Kota.

[6] Mahkamah Agung Republik Indonesia, Putusan Nomor 23 P/HUM/2024, 29 Mei 2024.

[7] Mahkamah Konstitusi Republik Indonesia, Putusan Nomor 70/PUU-XXII/2024, 20 Agustus 2024.

[8] D. Supriyanto, Demokrasi dan Pemilu. Jakarta: Perludem, 2021.

[9] I. R. Satria and H. Kurniawan, “Telaah Teori Demokrasi Prosedural: Refleksi Pilkada di Kota Cimahi,” Khazanah Multidisiplin, vol. 3, no. 2, pp. 251–266, 2022, doi: 10.15575/kl.v3i2.24093.

[10] G. A. Arum, “Konsep Keadilan (Iustitia) Perspektif St. Thomas Aquinas dan Relevansinya bagi Pemaknaan Sila V Pancasila,” Lumen Veritatis: Jurnal Teologi dan Filsafat, vol. 10, no. 1, pp. 23–44, 2019, doi: 10.30822/lumenveritatis.v10i1.207.

[11] H. Rhiti, Filsafat Hukum. Yogyakarta: Universitas Atma Jaya Yogyakarta, 2011.

[12] Jumadil, “Analisis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi No. 58/PUU-XVII/2019 tentang Syarat Usia Calon Kepala Daerah Ditinjau Berdasarkan Fiqh Siyasah,” undergraduate thesis, UIN Ar-Raniry, Banda Aceh, 2020.

[13] D. A. Darmawan and A. U. Wijaya, “Teori Opened Legal Policy dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023,” Gorontalo Law Review, vol. 7, no. 1, pp. 111–125, 2024, doi: 10.32662/golrev.v7i1.3355.

[14] M. D. Fadhillah, R. Priskap, and Bustanuddin, “Analisis Yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Terkait Batas Usia Pencalonan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden,” Limbago: Journal of Constitutional Law, vol. 4, no. 3, pp. 329–339, 2024, doi: 10.22437/limbago.v4i3.37447.

[15] M. M. Mukhlis, A. Ilmar, Maskun, Aswanto, and M. S. Tajuddin, “Politik Dinasti dalam Pemilihan Kepala Daerah: Tantangan terhadap Demokrasi dan Urgensi Reformasi Hukum di Indonesia,” Jurnal Konstitusi, vol. 21, no. 4, pp. 565–587, 2024, doi: 10.31078/jk2143.

[16] U. Rasyid, F. M. Wantu, and N. M. Nggilu, Wajah Kekuasaan Kehakiman Indonesia: Analisis Yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dan Putusan Mahkamah Agung yang Bersifat A Contrario. Yogyakarta: UII Press, 2020.

[17] F. Arifin, “Efektivitas Putusan Erga Omnes dalam Mengatasi Pelanggaran Hukum Tata Usaha Negara,” UNES Law Review, vol. 6, no. 4, pp. 12583–12592, 2024, doi: 10.31933/unesrev.v6i4.2258.

[18] A. Tumuhulawa, F. D. Susilo, and R. Kasim, “Analisis Sistem Pengawasan Hakim dalam Mewujudkan Peradilan yang Akuntabel,” Jurnal Hukum Bisnis, vol. 2, no. 2, pp. 95–109, 2024, doi: 10.37606/j-kumbis.v2i2.169.