<![CDATA[This article examines the dynamics of the legal–political framework governing local elections in Indonesia by situating the debate between direct elections by the people and indirect elections through Regional People’s Representative Councils (DPRD) within the perspective of constitutional democracy. This study employs a qualitative juridical-normative research method with a descriptive-analytical approach, relying on the analysis of statutory regulations, Constitutional Court decisions, and relevant legal and political literature. The findings indicate that the mechanism for electing regional heads in Indonesia has undergone a historical shift from a centralistic model to representative democracy and subsequently to direct democracy as a consequence of constitutional reform and the strengthening of popular sovereignty. Direct local elections have proven to enhance political legitimacy, public participation, and the accountability of regional leaders; however, they also generate structural problems such as high political costs, money politics, horizontal conflicts, and inefficiencies in regional governance. Meanwhile, local elections conducted through the DPRD possess constitutional legitimacy under Article 18 paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, yet they potentially narrow the space for popular sovereignty and concentrate power in the hands of political party elites. This study concludes that although both mechanisms are constitutionally valid, direct local elections are more consistent with the principles of substantive constitutional democracy, as they are better able to maintain a balance between legal legitimacy, social legitimacy, and the protection of popular sovereignty within Indonesia’s constitutional system]]>
Copyrights © 2026
