<![CDATA[This article analyzes the inconsistency of the Constitutional Court's (MK) decisions regarding the application of the open legal policy doctrine, specifically focused on Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 concerning the minimum age requirements for Presidential and Vice-Presidential candidates. The purpose of this article is to examine the internal and external factors driving this jurisprudential shift and to evaluate its juridical and constitutional implications on the Indonesian legal system. The methodology employed is a normative legal research method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The findings prove that the Constitutional Court shifted its paradigm from judicial restraint to aggressive judicial activism, transforming its role from a negative legislator into a positive legislator by introducing new alternative norm criteria outside the legislative process. This inconsistency is internally driven by fragmentation in legal reasoning among constitutional judges and externally influenced by political pressure and institutional conflicts of interest. The decision ultimately weakens the legal certainty framework, erodes the checks and balances system, and triggers the judicialization of politics in Indonesia. This study recommends a conceptual reconstruction of the open legal policy boundary to restore the Court's integrity.]]>
Copyrights © 2025
