<![CDATA[The integration of artificial intelligence into the Constitutional Court of Indonesia precipitates an acute ontological crisis, exposing a severe regulatory vacuum where algorithmic "black box" heuristics directly threaten the doctrine of judicial independence and the constitutional guarantee of due process of law. Prior digital constitutionalism literature predominantly remains trapped in a dichotomy of technocratic capitulation or secular rejection, neglecting the intersection of algorithmic governance with Islamic constitutional epistemology (Siyasah Dusturiyah). This doctrinal research reconstructed the parameters of judicial autonomy by synthesizing digital constitutionalism with the Neo-Siyasah framework. Utilizing conceptual, statutory, and comparative approaches, the study systematically analyzed domestic jurisprudence and global AI regulatory architectures. The findings conclusively establish that delegating adjudicative reasoning to predictive algorithms introduces untraceable normative asymmetry, constituting manipulative uncertainty (Gharar) that fatally undermines substantive justice (Adalah). To preserve cognitive sovereignty, this article introduces the doctrine of Siyasah Digital Constitutionalism, asserting that judicial independence must necessarily transcend traditional executive separation to explicitly include technological autonomy. Consequently, the research mandates the strict operationalization of a hierarchical "Centaur Model," relegating AI exclusively to auxiliary administrative functions while preserving moral constitutional interpretation (Hikmah and Rahmah) as the absolute, non-delegable prerogative of the human justices. Furthermore, the study demands the institutionalization of a "Digital Hisbah," an independent algorithmic audit apparatus, to continuously enforce transparent computational accountability against corporate tech monopolies. Ultimately, this novel theoretical synthesis provides a universally adaptable structural blueprint for apex courts globally, ensuring that technological modernization never subjugates the fundamental human dignity and moral accountability inherent in constitutional adjudication.]]>
