<![CDATA[This research examines the constitutional necessity of reconstructing the election design in Indonesia following the Constitutional Court Decision Number 135/PUU-XXII/2024. The current concurrent election model, which involves casting five ballots simultaneously, has been empirically shown to impose excessive cognitive burdens on voters, leading to a decline in the rationality of political choices and the marginalization of local issues. Using a normative legal research method with statute and conceptual approaches, this study argues that the previous “all-in-one” election design sacrificed meaningful participation for the sake of formalistic administrative efficiency. The findings indicate that separating national and regional elections is a constitutional imperative to restore the quality of democratic deliberation. This separation allows voters to engage more deeply with candidate profiles and local development agendas, thereby strengthening the legitimacy of both executive and legislative bodies. Furthermore, the study highlights that the transition to this new design requires urgent harmonization of electoral regulations and robust infrastructure readiness to ensure legal certainty and political stability. The reconstruction of the election design is not merely a technical adjustment but a systemic effort to align the electoral process with constitutional principles, ensuring that the manifestation of popular sovereignty remains substantive, rational, and accountable. Ultimately, the success of this reform depends on the political will of lawmakers to prioritize the protection of citizens' constitutional rights over short-term political interests, thereby fostering a more mature and resilient democracy for the nation's future.]]>
