<![CDATA[This study aims to comprehensively analyze the relationship between the fundamental values of Pancasila as the philosophical foundation of the state and legal norms within the Indonesian constitutional system, as well as to examine the consistency of their implementation within the hierarchy of laws and regulations. Pancasila, as the Staatsfundamentalnorm, holds a central and fundamental position in shaping and guiding all national legal products. Therefore, every legal norm should reflect and remain consistent with the values embodied in Pancasila. This research employs a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The analysis is conducted through the examination of various laws and regulations, court decisions, and relevant legal doctrines to identify the extent to which Pancasila values are internalized within Indonesia’s positive law system. The findings indicate that inconsistencies and lack of synchronization still exist between Pancasila as the fundamental norm and the legal norms beneath it in the hierarchy of legislation. These discrepancies are influenced by several factors, including legal-political dynamics, power interests in the legislative process, and weak mechanisms of regulatory harmonization and synchronization. From the perspective of Hans Kelsen’s Stufentheorie, consistency within the legal hierarchy is a fundamental requirement for establishing an orderly and just legal system. Furthermore, the Constitutional Court plays a strategic role as the guardian of the constitution, functioning as a corrective mechanism through its authority of judicial review. Through its decisions, the Court seeks to ensure that laws do not contradict the 1945 Constitution and the values of Pancasila. However, the effectiveness of this role still faces challenges, particularly in maintaining consistency in judicial decisions and their implementation in constitutional practice. This study recommends strengthening the integration of Pancasila values at every stage of the legislative process, from planning to evaluation. It also emphasizes the need to improve regulatory harmonization, reinforce the role of constitutional review institutions, and promote legal-political commitment aligned with constitutional supremacy and the fundamental values of the state. Ultimately, these efforts are expected to foster a legal system that is not only normatively consistent but also capable of delivering substantive justice for society.]]>
