The Dynamics of the Constitutional Court’s Authority in Adjudicating Presidential Election Disputes in 2024

Abstrak

According to the Constitutional Court’s case law, petitions concerning disputes over presidential election results fall into two categories: quantitative petitions, which relate to vote-counting results, and qualitative petitions, which concern alleged procedural violations or irregularities in the conduct of elections.. Although the Constitutional Court more frequently decides cases on quantitative grounds, it has also considered qualitative claims relating to electoral violations that may undermine the legitimacy of the electoral process. This study examines the dynamics of the Constitutional Court’s authority in adjudicating presidential election disputes, as well as the challenges it faces in upholding the principle of electoral justice. The study concludes that constitutional rulings lacking decisiveness, such as those in the 2024 presidential election dispute cases, may weaken public perceptions of electoral legitimacy and further impede the realization of electoral justice. Therefore, the Constitutional Court needs to strengthen clear legal procedures that reflect electoral justice while safeguarding the legitimacy of Indonesia’s democracy