IMPLIKASI KONSTITUSIONAL PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NOMOR 135/PUU-XXII/2024 TERHADAP PERPANJANGAN MASA JABATAN ANGGOTA DPRD

Abstract

This research is motivated by Constitutional Court Decision Number 135/PUU-XXII/2024, which separates national and regional elections and affects the terms of office of DPRD members, thereby raising constitutional issues concerning the principles of periodic elections and popular sovereignty as regulated in Article 1 paragraph (2) and Article 22E of the 1945 Constitution. This study aims to analyze the Constitutional Court’s legal considerations and formulate recommendations for a constitutional transition design that can be implemented without extending the terms of office of DPRD members. The research uses normative legal methods with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Legal materials were collected through literature studies and analyzed qualitatively using prescriptive techniques to assess the conformity of legal norms with constitutional principles. The results show that although the separation of elections is intended to improve effectiveness and strengthen the presidential system, it potentially extends DPRD members’ terms of office, which is considered contrary to democratic legitimacy and the principle of limiting power because it bypasses renewal of the people’s mandate. Alternative transition designs, such as by-elections and the Interim Replacement mechanism, each have advantages and weaknesses. Therefore, lawmakers should immediately formulate transitional regulations that ensure legal certainty, maintain periodicity of power, and uphold the sovereignty of the people. In addition, the study emphasizes that transitional arrangements must remain proportional, constitutional, and applicable so that electoral reforms do not create institutional instability or reduce public trust in democratic institutions at both national and regional levels.