A Commentary: the Inadmissibility of Non-Indonesian Citizens in Judicial Review before the Indonesian Constitutional Court

Bayu Mahendra


The Constitutional Court of Indonesia, in its judgment No 2-3/PUU—V/2007, ruled that non-Indonesian citizens have no legal standing to file judicial review before the Court. In determining the legal standing, the Court rejected applicants’ constitutional loss which should actually serve as the substantial examination in judicial review but rather addressed this question on the basis of applicant’s citizenship. This inadmissibility ruling, however, raises question on what legal standing actually mean in the context of judicial review. This paper reviews the Court’s consideration in determining legal standing status and examines future legal consequences of such reasoning. By revisiting the substance of legal standing and judicial review derived from the 1945 Constitution, relevant Statutes, Court’s practices and case law, as well as the dissenting opinion of the judges in this case, it is found that the Court overruled the substance to procedural examination on the basis of citizenship and therefore failed to address the actual question of legal standing. This paper concludes that the Court’s reasoning has abandoned the constitutional loss as the very substance of legal standing and to which amounts to immunity of legal standing provision from a judicial review. Consequently, non-Indonesian citizens will never be recognized in judicial review mechanism before the Indonesian Constitutional Court.


Non-Indonesian Citizens; Judicial Review; Immunity

Full Text:



Andras, Jakab. European Constitutional Language. Cambridge University Press, 2016.

Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Hukum Acara Pengujian Undang-Undang. Jakarta: Konstitusi Pers, 2006.

Bisariyadi. “Membedah Doktrin Kerugian Konstitusional.” Jurnal Konstitusi 14, no. 1 (2017): 22–44.

Flethcer, George. Basic Concepts of Criminal Law. New York: Oxford University Press, 1998.

Flethcer, William. “The Structure of Standing.” The Yale Law Journal 98, no. 221 (1988).

Hadjon, Philipus. Pengantar Hukum Administrasi Indonesia-Introduction to the Indonesian Administrative Law 3rd Edition. Surabaya: Gadjah Mada University Press, 1994.

Hendrianto, Stefanus. “Convergence or Borrowing: Standing in the Indonesian Constitutional Court.” Constitutional Review 1, no. 1 (2015): 28–49.

Indonesian Law Number 22 of 1997 on Narcotics (1997)

Indonesian Law Number 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court (2003).

Indonesian Law Number 48 of 2009 on Judicial Power (2009).

Judicial Review Number 1 of 1979 on Extradition, No. 73/PUU-VIII/2010 (The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia 2010).

Judicial Review Number 22 of 1997 on Narcotics against the 1945 Constitution, No. 2–3/PUU–V/2007 (The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia 2007).

Judicial Review Number 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court as it has been amended into Law Number 8 of 2011 on the Amendment of Law Number 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court against the 1945 Constitution, No. 137/PUU-XII/2014 (The Constitutional Court of ther Republic of Indonesia 2014).

Judicial Review Number 32 of 2004 on Regional Government against the 1945 Constitution, No. 006/PUU-III/2005 (The Constitutional Court 2005).

Judicial Review Number 56 Prp of 1960 on the Determination of Agricultural Land Area against the 1945 Constitution, No. 11/PUU-V/2007 (The Constitutional Court of the Republic of Indonesia 2007).

Kelsen, Hans. General Theory of Law and State (20th Century Legal Philosophy Series Vol. I). Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1949.

———. Pure Theory of Law (2nd German Edition Max Knight). New Jersey: The Law Book Exchange, Ltd, 2005.

Marzuki, Laica. “Legal Standing, Sisi Lain Pengujian UU Di MK.” Kompas. 2004, 8 edition.

Rahardjo, Satjipto. Ilmu Hukum. 6th ed. Bandung: Citra Aditya Bakti, 2006.

Sulaiman, King Faisal. Teori Peraturan Perundang-Undangan Dan Aspek Pengujiannya. Yogyakarta: Thafa Media, 2017.

The 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia (1945).


  • There are currently no refbacks.

Copyright (c) 2018 Constitutional Review