<![CDATA[Redam Guruh Krismantara Bisowarno Fakultas Hukum Universitas Brawijaya Jl. MT. Haryono No. 169, Ketawanggede, Kota Malang email: crimsonblaster12@gmail.com   Abstrak Penulis mengangkat permasalahan mengenai kebolehan Pengurus Partai Politik untuk mencalonkan diri sebagai calon Anggota Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD) berdasarkan Putusan MK Nomor 30/PUU-XVI/2018. Kemudian KPU melakukan respons konstitusional dengan mengganti PKPU Nomor 14/2018 menjadi PKPU 26/2018 yang merupakan respon dari adanya Putusan MK. Namun pada Pasal 60A PKPU 26/2016 tersebut diajukan gugatan terhadap MA. Alhasil MA dan MK menghasilkan putusan yang berbeda. Namun fokus penulisan adalah tentang putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi yang dikaitkan dengan prinsip negative legislator. Pada Putusan tersebut, MK dianggap telah membuat tafsiran norma dengan menafsirkan frase “pekerjaan lain†dalam Pasal 182 huruf l UU Pemilu sebagai pengurus partai politik. Kata Kunci: Mahkamah Konstitusi, Pemilu, DPD  Abtract The author raises an issue regarding the permissibility of political party officials for registering as Regional Representative Council (DPD) candidates based on Constitutional Court’s Decision Number 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018. Then the KPU made a constitutional response by replacing PKPU Number 14/2018 to PKPU 26/2018 which was a response from the Constitutional Court’s Decision. However, in Article 60A PKPU 26/2016, the lawsuit was filed against Supreme Court. As a result, Supreme Court and Constitutional Court issued different decisions. However, the paper focuses on the Constitutional Court's decision which is associated with the principle of negative legislator. In that Decision, Constitutional Court was considered to have interpreted the norm by interpreting the phrase "other business" in Article 182 letter l of the General Election Law as political party officials.  Keywords: Constitutional Court, General Election, Regional Representative Council]]>
