<![CDATA[This study aims to analyze the ratio decidendi in Constitutional Court Decision Number 90-01-05-12/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 and examine the implications of the Court’s legal considerations for justice and legal certainty in the resolution of General Election Result Disputes. This research employs a normative juridical method using a statutory approach and a case approach. Legal materials were obtained through library research consisting of primary, secondary, and tertiary legal materials, which were subsequently analyzed deductively. The results indicate that the Court’s ratio decidendi was systematically constructed through examination of its jurisdiction, legal standing, filing deadline, and evidence concerning the impact of alleged violations on vote results. The Court positioned itself as a court of result by emphasizing the existence of a direct and significant relationship between violations and changes in election results. Such considerations strengthen legal certainty through strict procedural requirements, consistency in applying legal norms, limited jurisdiction, and the finality of decisions. From the perspective of justice, the decision demonstrates a stronger emphasis on procedural justice because correction of election results depends heavily on the Applicant’s ability to establish the concrete and measurable impact of the alleged violations. The decision reflects a formalistic-positivistic approach to constitutional adjudication oriented toward maintaining the stability of election results while simultaneously demonstrating the need to balance legal certainty with substantive justice.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
