Tanggapan pakar soal keluarga presiden-wapres dilarang maju pilpres

Jakarta, IDN Times – Titi Anggraini, a distinguished Election Law lecturer from the Faculty of Law at the University of Indonesia (UI), has offered her insightful perspective on the recent judicial review petition filed against Article 169 of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning General Elections (the Election Law) at the Constitutional Court (MK). This significant petition, registered under case number 81/PUU-XXIV/2026, explicitly seeks to prohibit immediate family members of the sitting president or vice president from contesting the upcoming presidential election.

According to Titi, this petition should be viewed as a vital effort to safeguard the fairness and integrity of the political arena. Its core objective is not to arbitrarily restrict individual rights, but rather to ensure that political competition is founded on a clash of ideas and merit, not on the inherent privileges of power. “When there is no room for suspicion of abuse of power, the people’s right to obtain elections that are direct, general, free, confidential, honest, fair, and democratic can be better guaranteed. Within this framework, I believe this petition possesses a constitutionally viable argumentative basis that warrants serious consideration,” she told IDN Times on Thursday (February 26, 2026).

1. Incumbent Kinship Often Leads to Serious Issues

Titi emphasized that fundamental human rights in elections extend beyond the candidates; they are intrinsically tied to citizens as the ultimate holders of sovereignty. The populace holds a constitutional right to genuinely free, honest, fair, and democratic electoral contests. Therefore, every aspect of candidate nomination regulations must be examined not solely from the perspective of an individual’s right to be elected, but equally from the collective right of citizens to a high-quality democracy.

In practice, the existence of kinship ties with incumbent officials frequently gives rise to profound challenges. Numerous instances have demonstrated that family connections often run parallel with deviations and abuses of power, encompassing the illicit mobilization of state resources, the erosion of apparatus neutrality, and a distortion of the competitive landscape. “We witnessed such dynamics in the 2024 Mahakam Ulu regional elections, and also the protracted controversy surrounding nominations in the 2024 presidential election, which ultimately triggered a crisis of public trust,” she asserted.

2. High Urgency for Judicial Review of Article 169 of the Election Law

According to Titi, the urgency for a judicial review of Article 169 of the Election Law is exceptionally high, particularly given the current political climate. With the Election Law bill actively under discussion and the upcoming election stages soon to commence, the issues raised in the petition, concerning the constitutionality of the norm, demand authoritative interpretation from the Constitutional Court. Such constitutional certainty is paramount to guide lawmakers in formulating regulations that avoid future conflicts of interest, unfair competition, or the delegitimization of the electoral process.

Without clear guidelines established early on, the potential for disputes and a recurring crisis of public trust, as observed in previous experiences, remains significant. Consequently, any ruling by the Constitutional Court, irrespective of its specific outcome, will serve as a crucial benchmark for the future design of election law, simultaneously ensuring that the fundamental principles of competitive fairness and electoral integrity are steadfastly upheld. “To a certain extent, the existing legal framework is not robust enough to prevent nepotism, primarily because there are no explicit regulations anticipating conflicts of interest stemming from power-based family relationships with incumbents. Moreover, with party internal cadre regeneration and political recruitment systems still lacking democratic maturity, the avenues for the reproduction of kinship-based power remain wide open,” Titi remarked.

Furthermore, Titi highlighted that this prevailing situation carries substantial risks. In several regional head election contests, it has regrettably shifted the focus of competition from merit and ideas towards privileged access to power. Over the long term, this trajectory will invariably weaken internal party democracy, constrict elite circulation, and diminish the quality of political representation. “Therefore, the debate surrounding the limitations on conflicts of interest involving incumbent families must be framed within the context of preserving competitive fairness, strengthening party democratization, and safeguarding citizens’ rights to truly competitive, direct, general, free, confidential, honest, and fair elections,” she added emphatically.

3. Election Law Article on Presidential and Vice-Presidential Candidate Requirements Under Review by MK

As previously mentioned, two legal advocates, Raden Nuh and Dian Amalia, initiated this crucial judicial review petition against Article 169 of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning General Elections (the Election Law) at the Constitutional Court (MK).

In their petition, officially registered under case number 81/PUU-XXIV/2026, the two petitioners formally request the Constitutional Court to impose a ban on any family member of the incumbent president or vice president from participating in the presidential election contest.

The petitioners’ core demand, outlined in their petitum, urges the Constitutional Court to declare Article 169 of the Election Law as being in conflict with the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and, consequently, devoid of binding legal force. They specifically seek for the article to be amended to include a provision mandating that presidential and/or vice-presidential candidates must be free from any conflicts of interest arising from consanguineous (blood) or affinity (marital) relationships with the currently serving President and/or Vice President within the same term of office.

The petitioners meticulously articulated several compelling reasons for seeking this judicial review of Article 169 of the Election Law. Primarily, they expressed profound concern over the potential for conflicts of interest to arise if no explicit regulations are in place to restrict the participation of presidential or vice-presidential family members in the election.

From the petitioners’ perspective, Indonesia, as a nation governed by the rule of law, necessitates the proactive prevention of conflicts of interest, wherein the law serves a crucial preventive function. They argue that actual proof of a conflict occurring is not required; the mere existence of a structural potential inherent in power relationships is sufficient grounds for concern. “Familial relationships between candidates and incumbent officials are inherently: a) laden with potential for conflicts of interest; b) contain the possibility of undue influence over state administration; and c) carry the significant risk of apparatus non-neutrality,” the petitioners underscored in their submitted legal brief.

The petitioners firmly believe that if the law fails to provide any limitations whatsoever, the rule of law could lose its fundamental preventive capacity, rendering the legal framework formally neutral but substantively permissive. Furthermore, they contend that if Article 169 of the Election Law merely outlines “administrative/formative requirements” without incorporating safeguards against conflicts of interest, while in reality, opportunities for intervention or privilege from state officials to benefit family members exist, then the execution of popular sovereignty becomes compromised, and the principles of a state governed by law are undermined because the law fails to prevent the abuse of power.

“Article 169 of the Election Law, by lacking safeguards to prevent conflicts of interest and nepotism in presidential/vice-presidential nominations, creates an open avenue for such conflicts and practices,” the petitioners further elaborated.

It is important to note that Article 169 of the Election Law currently delineates the comprehensive requirements for individuals seeking to run as presidential (capres) and vice-presidential (cawapres) candidates. The specific text of the article currently under judicial review is as follows:

The requirements to become a presidential candidate and vice-presidential candidate are:

1. devout to God Almighty;
2. an Indonesian Citizen since birth and has never accepted another citizenship of their own volition;
3. the spouse of the presidential candidate and the spouse of the vice-presidential candidate must be Indonesian Citizens;
4. has never betrayed the state and has never committed corruption or other serious criminal acts;
5. mentally and physically capable of carrying out the duties and responsibilities as President and Vice President, and free from drug abuse;
6. resides within the territory of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia;
7. has reported their assets to the authorized institution that audits reports on state officials’ wealth;
8. is not currently burdened by personal debts and/or debts of a legal entity under their responsibility that cause financial losses to the state;
9. has not been declared bankrupt by a court decision;
10. has never committed a reprehensible act;
11. is not currently nominated as a member of the DPR, DPD, or DPRD;
12. is registered as a voter;
13. possesses a taxpayer identification number and has fulfilled the obligation to pay taxes for the last 5 (five) years, evidenced by the annual income tax return for individual taxpayers; has not served as President or Vice President for 2 (two) terms in the same office;
14. is loyal to Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia, and Bhinneka Tunggal Ika (Unity in Diversity);
15. has never been sentenced to imprisonment based on a court decision that has obtained permanent legal force for committing a criminal act punishable by imprisonment of 5 (five) years or more;
16. is at least 40 (forty) years old;
17. has at least a high school diploma, madrasah aliyah, vocational high school, vocational madrasah aliyah, or other equivalent education;
18. is not a former member of the prohibited Indonesian Communist Party organization, including its mass organizations, or not a person directly involved in the G.30.S/PKI; and
19. possesses a vision, mission, and program for carrying out the governance of the Republic of Indonesia.

UU Pemilu Digugat, MK Diminta Larang Keluarga Presiden-Wapres Maju Pilpres

Respons Gibran soal PAN Dukung Prabowo-Zulhas di Pemilu 2029

Partai Gema Bangsa: Pemilu 2029 Bisa Jadi Konsolidasi Kekuatan Lama