cover
Article Per Year (5 Year)
All
Home Page
OAI Link
Editorial Team
Contact
Reviewer
Google Scholar
Contact Name
Zulkarnain Ridlwan
Contact Email
constitutionale@fh.unila.ac.id
Phone
+6281369592059
Journal Mail Official
constitutionale@fh.unila.ac.id
Editorial Address
B. Building, Faculty of Law Universitas Lampung. Prof. Sumantri Brojonegoro St. No 1, Gedong Meneng, Bandar Lampung. Lampung-35145. Indonesia
Location
Kota bandar lampung,
Lampung
INDONESIA
Constitutionale
Published by Universitas Lampung
ISSN : 27232492     EISSN : 27459322     DOI : https://doi.org/10.25041/constitutionale
Core Subject : Social,
Law, Crime, Criminology & Criminal Justice Social Sciences
The Constitutionale Journal is a scientific journal which is the dissemination of constitution and the constitutional law universally. The Constitutional Journal publishes articles that consist of research or conceptual studies regarding the study of basic rights in state’s constitution, election law, (local) governmental law, juridical law, constitutional court, and legislation. This journal is a media intended for academics, practitioners and legal expertise in actualizing research, development and legal and constitutional analysis ideas. The Constitutional Journal is published by the Faculty of Law, Universitas Lampung for two issues a year.
Arjuna Subject : Ilmu Sosial - Hukum
Articles 76 Documents
 4   5   6   7   8 
Between Legal Certainty and Democratic Legitimacy: The Normative Void of the Constitutional Court Decision No. 135/PUU-XXII/2024 in Indonesia’s Constitutional System Ikhsan Setiawan; Muchammad Daing Azimattara
Constitutionale Vol 6 No 2 (2025)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/constitutionale.v6i2.4647

Abstract

General elections are the primary mechanism for realizing popular sovereignty under the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Constitutional Court Decision No. 135/PUU-XXII/2024 marks a major shift in electoral design by separating national and regional elections, departing from the simultaneous model affirmed in Decision No. 55/PUU-XVII/2019. Although final and binding, the ruling creates a normative void due to the absence of transitional provisions. This study analyzes the constitutional implications of this paradigm shift, examines its consistency with prior jurisprudence, and evaluates regulatory transition options to preserve legal certainty and democratic legitimacy. Using a normative juridical method with conceptual and statutory approaches, the research finds that the divergence between the two decisions weakens legal certainty and risks institutional disruption, electoral disputes, and declining public trust ahead of the 2029 election. The case highlights tensions in the Court’s evolving role and underscores the urgent need for legislative action to establish clear transitional regulations to safeguard electoral stability and democratic legitimacy.
The Reinstatement of Repealed Norms: A Paradox in Post–Constitutional Court Legislative Practice Adeb Davega Prasna; Adelia Putri; Meri Yarni
Constitutionale Vol 6 No 2 (2025)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/constitutionale.v6i2.4734

Abstract

The Constitutional Court is authorized to review statutes against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia,, and its decisions are final and binding. However, the absence of an explicit prohibition against reenacting annulled norms in Law Number 12 of 2011 in conjunction with Law Number 13 of 2022 on the Formation of Legislation creates legal uncertainty and risks weakening the authority of the Court. This study analyzes the legal implications of Constitutional Court decisions for lawmakers in regulating a prohibition on reenacting revoked norms within the framework of the rule of law. Using a normative legal method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, the study finds that Constitutional Court decisions are erga omnes and obligate lawmakers to follow up through amendment, revocation, or normative adjustment. The absence of explicit regulation enables the recurrence of unconstitutional norms and undermines constitutional supremacy. Therefore, clear statutory provisions prohibiting the reenactment of annulled norms are necessary to strengthen legal certainty and preserve the authority of Constitutional Court decisions.
Exposing Constitutional Violations: Vigilante Violence Against Northerners in Southern Nigeria Abubakar Muhammad jibril
Constitutionale Vol 7 No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/constitutionale.v7i1.4976

Abstract

Vigilante violence in Nigeria, particularly against Northerners in southern regions, exposes a gap between constitutional guarantees and lived reality. Although the Constitution of Nigeria protects the rights to life, equality, and security, weak enforcement has enabled recurring extrajudicial killings and ethnic profiling. This article examines whether such violence violates Section 33 (right to life), Section 42 (freedom from discrimination), and Section 14(2)(b) (state duty to ensure security and welfare). Using doctrinal and socio-legal analysis of constitutional provisions, case law, international instruments, and Amnesty International reports, the study finds persistent violations of life, patterns of indirect discrimination, and state failure to prevent and punish vigilante killings. These failures undermine constitutional legitimacy and national integration. The article recommends stronger accountability, disaggregated crime data, judicial enforcement of state obligations, and community-based initiatives to restore equal protection and the rule of law.
Political System Reform through the Abolition of the Presidential Threshold: An Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision Number 62/PUU-XXII/2024 Wendy Melfa; Renaldy Eka Putra
Constitutionale Vol 7 No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/constitutionale.v7i1.4931

Abstract

Constitutional Court Decision No. 62/PUU-XXII/2024 declared Article 222 of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections unconstitutional and without binding legal force, thereby abolishing the presidential threshold for nominating presidential and vice-presidential candidates. This study examines the implications of the decision for political system reform in Indonesia. Using a normative juridical method with statutory, conceptual, and case approaches, the study finds that the decision reflects the doctrine of open legal policy, which allows legislators to reformulate electoral regulations within constitutional limits. The abolition of the presidential threshold expands political competition, broadens leadership alternatives, and strengthens the principle of popular sovereignty. Viewed through the perspectives of responsive law and Roscoe Pound’s theory of law as a tool of social engineering, the decision serves as a catalyst for political reform by promoting a more inclusive, representative, and democratic electoral system.
Reforming the National Commission on Human Rights' Authority in Enforcing Gross Human Rights Violations in Indonesia Yesica Nur Wardana; Aries Isnandar; Yogi Prasetyo
Constitutionale Vol 7 No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/constitutionale.v7i1.5087

Abstract

The enforcement of gross human rights violations in Indonesia continues to face significant normative and institutional challenges, particularly in the relationship between the National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) and the Attorney General's Office under Law No. 26 of 2000 on Human Rights Courts. In practice, the resolution of such cases is often delayed by repeated returns of investigation files, weak inter-agency coordination, and the limited authority of Komnas HAM, which is restricted to preliminary investigations without investigative or prosecutorial powers. This study examines the weaknesses in the current allocation of authority and proposes institutional reforms from constitutional law and human rights perspectives. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. Lawrence M. Friedman's legal system theory provides the analytical framework for assessing the structural and substantive dimensions of human rights enforcement in Indonesia. The findings indicate that Komnas HAM's dependence on the Attorney General's Office at the investigation and prosecution stages has contributed to legal uncertainty and impeded the fulfillment of victims' rights to justice. The study further finds that Law No. 26 of 2000 does not provide a clear mechanism for following up on Komnas HAM's findings or establish time limits for case resolution. The study contributes to the literature by proposing reforms grounded in state responsibility and victims' rights. It recommends amending Law No. 26 of 2000 to strengthen institutional coordination, establish mandatory follow-up procedures for Komnas HAM's findings, and enhance the protection of victims' rights within Indonesia's human rights enforcement framework.
Constitutional Incoherence in Electoral Adjudication: An Analysis of Constitutional Court Decision No. 190/PHPU.D-VIII/2010 on Regional Election Violations and Substantive Justice Muhammad Bagus Nurullah; Febrian Indar Surya Kusuma
Constitutionale Vol 7 No 1 (2026)
Publisher : Fakultas Hukum Universitas Lampung

Show Abstract | Download Original | Original Source | Check in Google Scholar | DOI: 10.25041/constitutionale.v7i1.5473

Abstract

This article examines the legal reasoning adopted by the Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia in Decision Number 190/PHPU.D-VIII/2010 concerning the regional election dispute in Pandeglang Regency. It analyzes the Court's interpretation of electoral justice, the application of the structured, systematic, and massive (TSM) violations doctrine, and the evidentiary standards governing electoral disputes. The study aims to identify weaknesses in the Court's reasoning and reconstruct a more substantive constitutional approach that strengthens democratic integrity and protects political rights. Using normative and empirical legal methods, it applies statutory, conceptual, and case approaches supported by secondary empirical data from academic publications, legal journals, and public discussions on electoral dispute resolution in Indonesia. The findings show that the Court adopted a predominantly formalistic and quantitative approach by emphasizing vote differentials rather than the integrity of the democratic process. Strict evidentiary standards also hindered proof of violations involving intimidation, abuse of power, and political manipulation, limiting meaningful constitutional review. This article argues that electoral disputes should be treated not merely as procedural conflicts over vote tabulation but as constitutional issues involving democratic values, political equality, and public trust. It concludes that the Constitutional Court should adopt a more substantive and contextual model of constitutional reasoning to strengthen electoral justice and constitutional democracy in Indonesia.

Page 8 of 8 | Total Record : 76

 4   5   6   7   8 

Filter by Year

2020 2026


Reset
Filter By Issues
All Issue Vol 7 No 1 (2026) Vol 6 No 2 (2025) Vol 6 No 1 (2025) Vol 5 No 2 (2024) Vol 5 No 1 (2024) Vol 4 No 2 (2023) Vol. 4 No. 1 (2023) Vol. 3 No. 2 (2022) Vol. 3 No. 1 (2022) Vol. 2 No. 2 (2021) Vol. 2 No. 1 (2021) Vol. 1 No. 2 (2020) Vol. 1 No. 1 (2020) More Issue