Batas Usia Pencalonan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden: Kajian Hukum Tata Negara dan Politik dalam Sistem Demokrasi Indonesia
Kata Kunci:
Batas usia, hukum tata negara, demokrasi, pemilu, mahkamah konstitusiAbstrak
Perdebatan mengenai batasan usia pencalonan presiden dan wakil presiden di Indonesia mencerminkan dinamika antara kepastian hukum dan kebutuhan regenerasi kepemimpinan dalam sistem demokrasi. Ketentuan pasal 169 huruf qUndang-Undang Nomor 7 tahun 2017 menetapkan usia minimal 40 tahun, namun putusan mahkamah konstitusi nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023 memunculkan tafsir baruyang menambah alternatif syarat pengalaman sebagai kepala daerah. Penelitian ini bertujuan menganalisis dasar yuridis penetapan batas usia serta implikasi politiknya terhadap representatif legitimasi demokrasi, dan sirkulasi elit. Metode yang digunakan adalah penelitian hukum normatif drngan pendekatan konseptual, perundang-undangan, dan perbandingan, melalui trlaah terhadap UUD 1945, UU pemilu, putusan MK, serta literatur akademik. Hasil kajian menunjukkan bahwa batas usia memiliki fungsi ganda: menjaga kematangan pengalaman calon sekaligus berpotensi membatasi partisipasi politik generasi muda. Analisis perbandingan menunjukkan tidak ada konsensus global mengenai usia ideal, dengan variasi antara inklusivitas politik dan kebutuhan pengalaman kepemimpinan. Kesimpulannya, polemik batas usia lebih tepat diselesaikanmelalui mekanisme legislatif yang terbuka, bukan intervensi yudisial, agar tercipta keseimbangan antara meritokrasi dan representasi. Penelitian ini berkontribusi pada pengayaan literatur hukum tata negara dan politik indonesia, khususnya dalam memahami relasi antara norma hukum dan praktik demokrasi.
Unduhan
Referensi
Aguiar Aguilar, A. A. (2023). Courts and the judicial erosion of democracy in Latin America. Politics and Policy, 51(1). https://doi.org/10.1111/polp.12516
Alberdi, J. L. (2024). The Judicialization of Politics. Revista Juridica Austral, 5(1). https://doi.org/10.26422/RJA.2024.0501.alb
Amalia, N., Marzuki, P. M., Nasution, S., Harefa, B. D. S., Jehani, L., Ali, Z., Djulaeka, Rahayu, D., Bambang, R. J., Soedarmoko, R., Setiawan, R., Jhonny, I., Efendi, J., Djumialdji, F. X., Harimurti, Hernoko, A. Y., Djumadi, Intansari, A. I., J Satrio, … Djumialdi, F. X. (2016). Metode Penelitian Hukum: Sebagai Suatu Pengantar. In Lex Privatum (Vol. 2, Issue 1).
Asshidiqie, J. (2009). Hukum Tata Negara dan Pilar-Pilar Demokrasi. Serpihan Pemikiran Hukum, Media Dan HAM, 2(1).
Barak, A. (2009). The Judge in a Democracy. Princeton University Press. https://doi.org/10.5860/choice.44-2338
Brennan, T. (2022). Teaching by Contradictions: Montesquieu’s Subversion of Piety in The Spirit of the Laws. Review of Politics, 84(4). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0034670522000651
Chakravarty, S. P., & Przeworski, A. (1992). Democracy and the Market: Political and Economic Reforms in Eastern Europe and Latin America. Bulletin of Latin American Research, 11(2). https://doi.org/10.2307/3338135
Chandranegara, I. S., Bakhri, S., & Ali, M. (2019). Judicial Reform and Democratic Consolidation in Indonesia. Jurnal Cita Hukum, 7(3). https://doi.org/10.15408/jch.v7i3.12228
Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023, (2023).
Curato, N., & Fossati, D. (2020). Authoritarian innovations. Democratization. https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2020.1777985
DeCanio, S. (2024). The Epistemology of Democracy and the Market: Rejoinder to Elliott. Critical Review, 36(1–2). https://doi.org/10.1080/08913811.2024.2363028
Easton, D. (1975). A Re-Assessment of the Concept of Political Support. British Journal of Political Science, 5(4). https://doi.org/10.1017/S0007123400008309
Garber Fuentes, C. (2019). How Democracies Die. Revista Chilena de Derecho y Ciencia Política, 10(1). https://doi.org/10.7770/rchdcp-v10n1-art1793
Gerards, J. H. (2023). A. Kavanagh, Constitutional Review under the UK Human Rights Act. Tijdschrift Voor Constitutioneel Recht, 2(3). https://doi.org/10.5553/tvcr/187966642011002003011
Ginsburg, T. (2009). Judicial Review in New Democracies. In Judicial Review in New Democracies. https://doi.org/10.1017/cbo9780511511189.002
Ginsburg, T., & Huq, A. Z. (2018). How to Save a Constitutional Democracy. In How to Save a Constitutional Democracy. https://doi.org/10.7208/chicago/9780226564418.001.0001
Helmke, G., & Ríos-Figueroa, J. (2011). Courts in Latin America. In Courts in Latin America. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511976520
Hirschl, R. (2005). Constitutionalism, Judicial Review, and Progressive Change: A Rejoinder to McClain and Fleming. Texas Law Review, 84(2).
Hoffmann, S., & Scharpf, F. W. (1999). Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic. Foreign Affairs, 78(5). https://doi.org/10.2307/20049488
Ibrahim, J. (2006). Teori dan Metodologi Penelitian Hukum Normatif. Bayumedia Publishing.
Jakab, A. (2018). How to Save a Constitutional Democracy. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 16(4). https://doi.org/10.1093/icon/moy107
Kavanagh, A. (2010). Constitutional Review Under the UK Human Rights Act. The Modern Law Review, 73(5).
Levine, S. (2004). Towards Juristocracy: The Origins and Consequences of the New Constitutionalism. Perspectives on Politics, 2(4). https://doi.org/10.1017/s1537592704590588
Lindsey, T., & Butt, S. (2018). Indonesian Law. Oxford University Press.
Marzuki, P. M. (2017). Penelitian Hukum. Kencana.
Mayne, Q. (2012). Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited by Pippa Norris. Political Science Quarterly, 127(4). https://doi.org/10.1002/j.1538-165x.2012.tb01134.x
McCorkindale, C. (2009). Political Constitutionalism: A Republican Defence of the Constitutionality of Democracy. Redescriptions: Political Thought, Conceptual History and Feminist Theory, 13(1). https://doi.org/10.7227/r.13.1.15
Mietzner, M. (2020). Authoritarian innovations in Indonesia: electoral narrowing, identity politics and executive illiberalism. Democratization, 27(6). https://doi.org/10.1080/13510347.2019.1704266
Montesquieu. (2025). Of The Spirit Of The Laws. In Readings from Liberal Writers: English and French. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781003589020-4
Norris, P. (2011). Democratic deficit: Critical citizens revisited. In Democratic Deficit: Critical Citizens Revisited. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511973383
Pitkin, H. F. (2023). THE CONCEPT OF REPRESENTATION. In The Concept of Representation. https://doi.org/10.1525/9780520340503
Repansah, M. (2025). Penerapan Sistem Demokrasi Konstitusional: Indikator dan Hambatan dalam Ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Staatsrecht: Jurnal Hukum Kenegaraan Dan Politik Islam, 4(2). https://doi.org/10.14421/ppky3465
Sanjaya, A. P., Endang Widuatie, M. R., Widya Putri, C. C., Ermayanti, E., Khoirul U, M. Z., & Septiani, E. W. (2025). Perubahan Putusan MK: Batas Usia Capres-Cawapres dan Implikasinya Terhadap Demokrasi. Jurnal Hukum Dan HAM Wara Sains, 4(02). https://doi.org/10.58812/jhhws.v4i02.2204
Scharpf, F. (2011). Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? In Governing in Europe: Effective and Democratic? https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198295457.001.0001
Soekamto, S., & Mamudji, S. (2015). Penelitian Hukum Normatif: Suatu Tinjauan Singkat. Rajawali Pers.
Swe Dberg, R. (1980). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Science & Society: A Journal of Marxist Thought and Analysis, 44(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/003682378004400121
Tushnet, M. (2008). Weak Courts, Strong Rights: Judicial Review and Social Welfare Rights in Comparative Constitutional Law (New Jersey). Princeton University Press.
Veigel, J. (2021). Die funktionale Methode bei der Rechtsvergleichung. Juridica International, 30. https://doi.org/10.12697/ji.2021.30.09
Waldron, J. (2006). The core of the case against judicial review. In Yale Law Journal (Vol. 115, Issue 6). https://doi.org/10.2307/20455656
Unduhan
Diterbitkan
Terbitan
Bagian
Lisensi
Hak Cipta (c) 2026 Alba Khairan Shodiqi, Moch. Alghani , Fajar Almunawar, Asy'ari (Author)
Artikel ini berlisensi Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
