TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Presidential age minimum ruling raises conflict of interest concerns
Observers have questioned the top court’s decision, highlighting the potential conflict of interest resulting from Anwar’s marriage to President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo’s sister and Jokowi’s eldest son Gibran’s national-scale political aspirations.
Change Size
Constitutional Court Chief Justice Anwar Usman reads out a ruling on a 2019 presidential election dispute on June 27, 2019. (JP/Donny Fernando)
Constitutional Court Chief Justice Anwar Usman is in the spotlight following a ruling on Monday that cleared the way for his nephew by marriage, Surakarta Mayor Gibran Rakabuming Raka, to run in the 2024 presidential election, with some observers calling the decision politically driven.
The court ruled in favor of adding a provision to the Elections Law allowing candidates under the age of 40 who had experience as elected officials to run in presidential elections. The case was filed by Surakarta University (UNSA) student Almas Tsaqibbirru, who, according to the petition, was inspired by Gibran’s success as mayor of the city.
Several hours before the justices read out the ruling, they rejected three similar petitions, filed by political parties and regional leaders, seeking to lower the minimum age for presidential and vice presidential candidates or to offer exceptions to those with governing experience.
The justices argued that such matters fell “under the authority of policymakers”.
In his dissenting opinion on the Almas ruling, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra said the justices had initially agreed to reject the petition at a meeting that Anwar did not attend.
But the decision changed during another meeting several days later at which Anwar was present. The majority of justices “suddenly showed an interest” in introducing an exception to the age minimum rule.
“Has the court ever changed its stance? It has, but never so fast that the change happened in only a few days,” Saldi said, adding that the sudden change of heart was “extraordinarily strange and distant from the limits of reasoning”.
