Hakim Pengganti Mahkamah Konstitusi

I Nyoman Suandika
Komang Edy Dharma Saputra
Ni Made Rit Meidyana

Mandub: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora
Vol. 4 No. 2 (2026): Juni: Mandub: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora

Article 47 of the Constitutional Court Law stipulates that a Constitutional Court decision has permanent legal force upon its pronouncement in a plenary session open to the public. This assertion raises the question of why legal remedies are not possible to correct a Constitutional Court decision, should an error occur. To achieve legal certainty, will the erroneous decision be enforceable indefinitely? The research question is: What is the rationale underlying the granting of permanent legal force to a Constitutional Court decision upon its pronouncement in a plenary session open to the public? This research employs normative legal research, employing statutory, conceptual, historical, and comparative approaches. The legal materials used are primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials. The legal materials were collected through document study. The legal materials were analyzed using descriptive and analytical techniques. The results of the study show that, the rationale underlying the granting of the permanent legal force of the Constitutional Court's decision since after it has been pronounced in a public plenary session is because the case submitted to the Constitutional Court is a case related to state administration so that it requires a quick decision and is bound by time limits so as not to disrupt the continuity of other state administration agendas. The possibility of a judicial review of the Constitutional Court's decision, viewed from a normative perspective, is not possible because Article 47 of the Constitutional Court Law states that the Constitutional Court's decision is permanent since it is pronounced in a public plenary session, and is further emphasized in the explanation of Article 10 number (1) that it is permanent, meaning that no legal action can be taken. furthermore in the Regulation of the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia Number 06/PMK/2005 concerning Guidelines for Proceedings in Cases of Judicial Review. There is no term for judicial review.