<![CDATA[Purpose of the Study: This study analyzes the ratio decidendi of Constitutional Court Decision No. 135/PUU-XXII/2024, its constitutional implications for separating Indonesian elections, and compares the design with Malaysia's multi-level electoral system. Methodology: This research employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, jurisprudential, and comparative approaches. Primary legal materials include the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, relevant election laws, Constitutional Court decisions, and the Federal Constitution of Malaysia. Secondary materials consist of legal doctrines, scholarly journals, and comparative constitutional law literature, which are analyzed qualitatively through descriptive and comparative methods. Results: The Court's decision shifts Indonesia's electoral architecture by separating national and regional elections to enhance substantive democracy. However, it raises constitutional challenges regarding legal certainty, transitional governance, and judicial norm formation. The comparison with Malaysia reveals that while both jurisdictions separate subnational elections, Malaysia's practice derives from a federal framework, whereas Indonesia remains a unitary state. Applications of this Study: The findings provide normative guidance for harmonizing electoral legislation and designing an adaptive post-decision electoral governance framework. Novelty/Originality of this study: This study offers a comparative constitutional analysis integrating Decision 135/PUU-XXII/2024 with Malaysia’s system to model post-decision electoral governance reconstruction in Indonesia. Keywords: Constitutional Implication; Elections; Constitutional Court Decision]]>
Copyrights © 2026
