Judge Saldi Isra on the Decision of the Age Limit for Presidential Candidates and Vice Presidential Candidates: This is the First Time I Have Experienced an Extraordinary Strange Event at the Constitutional Court

"Hakim Saldi Isra on Presidential and Vice-Presidential Age Limit Verdict: This is the First Time I Experience an Extraordinary Strange Event at the Constitutional Court"

"Dream - Saldi Isra became one of the two Constitutional Judges who submitted a dissenting opinion or different opinion on the decision of the material test case of Article 169 letter q of Law Number 7 of 2017. He admitted confusion with the decision made by the Constitutional Court. The article regulates the requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates to be at least 40 years old. However, in its decision, the Constitutional Court interpreted the article as, "The requirements to become a presidential and vice-presidential candidate are: q. aged at least 40 (forty) years or have previously/currently held a position chosen through general elections, including regional head elections"."

“Saya bingung dan benar-benar bingung untuk menentukan harus dari mana memulai pendapat berbeda (dissenting opinion) ini,”

"I am confused and truly confused about where to start this dissenting opinion,"

word Saldi Isra when reading his opinion in the trial at the Constitutional Court building, Monday, October 16, 2023.

Saldi Isra admitted that this is the first time he has encountered peculiarities since serving as a Constitutional Judge and stepping foot in the Constitutional Court building on April 11, 2017, or about six years ago.

Judge Saldi Isra on the Decision of the Age Limit for Presidential Candidates and Vice Presidential Candidates: This is the First Time I Have Experienced an Extraordinary Strange Event at the Constitutional Court

"Baru kali ini saya mengalami peristiwa 'aneh' yang 'luar biasa' dan dapat dikatakan jauh dari batas penalaran yang wajar,"
The words of Saldi Isra.

"dream.co.id"

According to him, the Court changed its opinion and attitude in an instant. Previously, in the decision on three requests, namely case number 29, 51, and 55/PUU-XXI/2023 [case number 29, 51, and 55], the Court stated that the amendment of Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017 is the authority of the legislator. There is no other way to change article 69 letter q, except by the legislator. "Has the Court ever changed its opinion? Yes, but it has never happened this quickly, where the change occurs within a matter of days," he said.

Saldi added, the change of the Court's stance not only disregards the previous ruling, but is based on very strong arguments after obtaining important facts that have changed in society. He questions what important facts have changed in society that led the Court to change its stance from rejecting the ruling in cases number 29, 51, and 55, to approving it in the ruling of case number 90\/PUU-XXI\/2023 [case number 90].

"Belasan Permohonan" translates to "Dozens of Applications" in English.

Saldi said, there are dozens of requests to test the minimum age limit of the candidates for President and Vice President in accordance with Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017. Case number 29, 51, and 55 are the requests of the first wave.

From the several cases mentioned, only those three requests were examined through a plenary session to hear statements from the parties involved, including the President, the DPR (People's Consultative Assembly), the relevant parties, the petitioner's expert, and also the expert from the relevant parties. The Constitutional Court's Deliberation Meeting (RPH) to decide on cases Number 29, 51, and 55, on September 19, 2023, was attended by eight Constitutional Judges. They are Saldi Isra, Arief Hidayat, Manahan MP Sitompul, Suhartoyo, Wahiduddin Adams, Enny Nurbaningsih, Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh, and M. Guntur Hamzah.

"Recorded, the Constitutional Court session on September 19, 2023 was not attended by Constitutional Judge and also the Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Anwar Usman,"
Saldi is firm.

"dream.co.id"

The result of the meeting, six Constitutional Judges agreed to reject cases Number 29, 51, and 55. The Court positions Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017 as an open legal policy for legislation. Meanwhile, two other Constitutional Judges chose a different stance (dissenting opinion). However, a different condition occurred in the next RPH, when discussing cases number 90 and Number 91/PUU-XXI/2023 [case number 91]. Whereas, the issue is the same, namely Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017, the discussion and decision-making of the second wave of applications. In the RPH discussing cases number 90 and 91, RPH was attended by nine Constitutional Judges. According to Saldi, some judges who decided to reject in cases Number 29-51-55/PUU-XXI/2023 suddenly became interested in the alternative model proposed by the applicant of case number 90.

"However, adding Saldi, even though the alternative model requested by the applicant in case number 90 has been substantially declared as an open legal policy in Constitutional Court Decision Number 29, 51, and 55. According to Saldi, signs of shifting and changing views and opinions of several judges from the decisions of CC Number 29, 51, and 55 have triggered much more detailed and thorough discussions. 'Therefore, the discussion had to be postponed and repeated several times,' he said."

"Furthermore, the applicants for case numbers 90 and 91 initially withdrew their applications. However, one day later they canceled the withdrawal. The Court had to schedule a panel hearing to confirm the withdrawal letter and the cancellation letter to the applicants. According to Saldi, regardless of the 'mystery' of the withdrawal and cancellation of case number 90, which occurred only one day apart, some Constitutional Judges in cases number 29, 51, and 55 expressed their rejection and positioned Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017 as an open legal policy for law formation, then 'changed direction' and took a final position by 'granting in part' in case number 90."

From the five judges who stated "partially granted" the request for case number 90, three Constitutional Judges interpret the norm of Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017 "at least 40 (forty) years old" by matching or providing an alternative with "or have held a position selected through general elections including regional head elections." Meanwhile, he added, the two Constitutional Judges who also "partially granted" interpreted the norm of Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017 "at least 40 (forty) years old" by matching or providing an alternative with "have served or are currently serving as governors."

"Even though it matches the position of governor, both of them submit the criteria for a governor that can be matched with a minimum age of 40 (forty) years to the law maker,"
Saldi.

"dream.co.id"

The translation of the given 'Bahasa' text to 'English' while preserving any HTML tags is: "Question from Saldi Isra".

After analyzing the facts, Saldi had a "lightweight" and provocative question. He asked, if the Constitutional Court (RPH) were to decide on cases number 29, 51, and 55, and all nine Constitutional Judges were present, would the result still reject the case and declare the authority to amend Article 69 letter q of Law 7/2017 as a legislative policy? Saldi also asked, if the RPH to decide on case number 90 had the same composition of judges as the verdict on cases number 29, 51, and 55, namely eight judges without the presence of Constitutional Judge Anwar Usman, would the result still be "rejected"?

According to Saldi, in factual terms, the change in the composition of judges who decided on cases number 29, 51, and 55, from eight people to nine people in cases number 90 and 91, is not just a matter of diverting considerations and verdicts. "But it overturns the 180-degree verdict from rejecting to granting, even with the addition of the phrase 'partially', thus becoming 'granting partially'," said Saldi Isra.

Presiden Joko Widodo

Ditanya Peluang Gibran Maju di Pilpres 2024 Usai Putusan MK Soal Batas Usia Capres-Cawapres, Ini Kata Jokowi

Putusan MK memungkinkan WNI berusia 40 tahun bisa maju di Pilpres asal sudah menjadi atau sedang menduduki jabatan yang dipilih melalui pemilu.

"Hakim Saldi Isra on Presidential and Vice-Presidential Age Limit Verdict: This is the First Time I Experience an Extraordinary Strange Event at the Constitutional Court"

"I am confused and truly confused about where to start this dissenting opinion,"

"Baru kali ini saya mengalami peristiwa 'aneh' yang 'luar biasa' dan dapat dikatakan jauh dari batas penalaran yang wajar,"The words of Saldi Isra.

"Belasan Permohonan" translates to "Dozens of Applications" in English.

"Recorded, the Constitutional Court session on September 19, 2023 was not attended by Constitutional Judge and also the Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Anwar Usman,"Saldi is firm.

"Even though it matches the position of governor, both of them submit the criteria for a governor that can be matched with a minimum age of 40 (forty) years to the law maker,"Saldi.

The translation of the given 'Bahasa' text to 'English' while preserving any HTML tags is: "Question from Saldi Isra".

"Baru kali ini saya mengalami peristiwa 'aneh' yang 'luar biasa' dan dapat dikatakan jauh dari batas penalaran yang wajar,"
The words of Saldi Isra.

"Recorded, the Constitutional Court session on September 19, 2023 was not attended by Constitutional Judge and also the Chairman of the Constitutional Court, Anwar Usman,"
Saldi is firm.

"Even though it matches the position of governor, both of them submit the criteria for a governor that can be matched with a minimum age of 40 (forty) years to the law maker,"
Saldi.