Judicial Overreach in Constitutional Court Decisions: Navigating the Boundary Between Constitutional Interpretation and Judicially Created Legislation

Authors

  • Kurdi Kurdi Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Adhyaksa Jakarta Timur, Indonesia
  • Joko Cahyono Sekolah Tinggi Ilmu Hukum Adhyaksa Jakarta Timur, Indonesia
  • Teuku Ahmad Dadek Universitas Syiah Kuala Aceh, Indonesia

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46924/jihk.v7i2.366

Keywords:

Judicial Overreach, Constitutional Court, Constitutional Decision, Constitutional Supremacy

Abstract

The imbalance between the Constitutional Court’s prescribed authority and its growing tendency to expand its judicial function has raised significant concerns regarding judicial overreach in Indonesia’s constitutional system. This study seeks to identify the defining characteristics of judicial overreach and to delineate the boundaries between legitimate constitutional interpretation and covert judicial lawmaking. It further evaluates the implications of this phenomenon for democratic legitimacy, public trust, and adherence to the separation-of-powers principle. Employing normative legal research methods, this study utilizes statutory, conceptual, and case-law analyses with a particular focus on Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023. The findings reveal a shift in the Constitutional Court’s role from a negative legislator to a positive legislator, evidenced by expanded interpretations unsupported by constitutional text and inconsistencies with established precedents. These developments have undermined public confidence and contributed to increasing constitutional uncertainty. The study concludes that stricter limitations on the Court’s interpretive discretion and enhanced judicial accountability are essential to preserving the integrity of constitutional review within Indonesia’s democratic framework.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Journals

Anggreni, Devi, Ahmad Fuadi, Fitriyani Fitriyani, and Muhammad Ibnu Al-Kautsar. “Peran Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Menjamin Kedaulatan Hukum Di Indonesia.” Hutanasyah: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara 3, no. 1 (2024): 11–26. https://doi.org/10.37092/hutanasyah.v3i1.868.

Ardhanariswari, Riris, Eko Nursetiawan, Syarafina Dyah Amalia, Enny Dwi Cahyani, and Rozlinda Mohamed Fadzil. “Upholding Judicial Independence through the Practice of Judicial Activism in Constitutional Review: A Study by Constitutional Judges.” Volksgeist: Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Dan Konstitusi 6, no. 2 (2023): 183–207. https://doi.org/10.24090/volksgeist.v6i2.9565.

Darmawan, Dwiky Arief, and Andy Usmina Wijaya. “Teori Opened Legal Policy Dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/Puu-XXI/2023.” Gorontalo Law Review 7, no. 1 (2024): 111–25. https://doi.org/10.32662/golrev.v7i1.3355.

Fathi, Muhammad, Aisyah Ajeng Putri Riyanto, Nanik Prasetyoningsih, and Muhammad Nur Rifqi Amirullah. “From Guardians to Threats? Abusive Judicial Review and Public Distrust.” Jurnal Hukum Ius Quia Iustum 32, no. 2 (2025): 505–527. https://doi.org/10.20885/iustum.vol32.iss2.art10.

Fikra, Mulazi Ibna. “Conflict of Interest Dalam Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023 Tentang Pengujian Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 Tentang Pemilihan Umum.” Tanfidziy: Jurnal Hukum Tata Negara Dan Siyasah 2, no. 2 (2023): 179–90. https://doi.org/10.47766/tanfidziy.

Hasanah, Galuh Nur, and Dona Budi Kharisma. “Eksistensi Judicial Activism Dalam Praktik Konstitusi Oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Sovereignty: Jurnal Demokrasi Dan Ketahanan Nasional 1, no. 4 (2022): 734–44. https://doi.org/10.13057/souvereignty.v1i4.122.

Mukherjee, Gaurav, and Juha Tuovinen. “Designing Remedies for a Recalcitrant Administration.” South African Journal on Human Rights 36, no. 4 (2020): 386–409. https://doi.org/10.1080/02587203.2021.1938660.

Patnuskar, Adv. Aditi Ganesh, and Prashali Balkrishna Jadhav. “Judicial Activism and the Doctrine of Basic Structure.” International Journal of Emerging Technologies and Innovative Research 3, no. 1 (2023): 130–35.

Prabowo, Bagus Surya. “Menggagas Judicial Activism Dalam Putusan Presidential Threshold Di Mahkamah Konstitusi.” Jurnal Konstitusi 19, no. 1 (2022): 73–96. https://doi.org/10.31078/jk1914.

Prasetio, Dicky Eko, and Adam Ilyas. “Judicial Activism Dalam Pengujian Konstitusionalitas Undang-Undang Ratifikasi.” Negara Hukum: Membangun Hukum Untuk Keadilan Dan Kesejahteraan 13, no. 2 (2022): 247–65. https://doi.org/10.22212/jnh.v13i2.3201.

Radjak, Sarmila, and Ahmad Ahmad. “Menguji Batas Kewenangan: Tafsir Mahkamah Konstitusi Atas UUD 1945 Dalam Dinamika Demokrasi Modern.” Al-Zayn: Jurnal Ilmu Sosial & Hukum 3, no. 3 (2025): 1800–1815. https://doi.org/10.61104/alz.v3i3.1436.

Resnik, Judith, and Lane Dilg. “Responding to a Democratic Deficit: Limiting the Powers and the Term of the Chief Justice of the United States.” University of Pennsylvania Law Review 154 (2006): 1575–1664. https://scholarship.law.upenn.edu/penn_law_review/vol154/iss6/8.

Rohmah, Elva Imeldatur. “Dinamika Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023 Tentang Persyaratan Usia Calon Presiden Dan Wakil Presiden.” Progresif: Jurnal Hukum 18, no. 1 (2024): 100–131. https://doi.org/10.33019/progresif.v18i1.4636.

Simamora, Anggiat P. “Independensi Hakim Mahkamah Konstitusi Dalam Perspektif Teori Hukum Murni Hans Kelsen: Studi Atas Putusan MK No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023.” Maras: Jurnal Penelitian Multidisiplin 3, no. 3 (2025): 1036–1046. https://doi.org/10.60126/maras.v3i3.1156.

Siregar, Anjas Rinaldi, and Anna Erliyana. “Disputes Over General Election Results Based on Judicial Activism and Judicial Restrain in Realizing the Principles of Honest and Fair in General Elections.” Jurnal Pendidikan IPS 15, no. 2 (2025): 373–84. https://doi.org/10.37630/jpi.v15i2.3102.

Subandri, Rio. “Tinjauan Yuridis Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023 Tentang Persyaratan Batas Usia Pencalonan Presiden Dan Wakil Presiden.” Jurnal Kajian Ilmu Hukum Dan Politik 2, no. 1 (2024): 135–53. https://doi.org/10.51903/jaksa.v2i1.1512.

Downloads

Published

2025-12-01

Issue

Vol. 7 No. 2 (2026): Jurnal Ilmu Hukum Kyadiren

Section

Articles

License

Copyright (c) 2025 Kurdi Kurdi, Joko Cahyono, Teuku Ahmad Dadek

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

  1. Copyright on any article is retained by the author(s).
  2. The author grants the journal, the right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgment of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
  4. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
  5. The article and any associated published material is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

How to Cite

Judicial Overreach in Constitutional Court Decisions: Navigating the Boundary Between Constitutional Interpretation and Judicially Created Legislation. (2025). JIHK, 7(2), 1013-1026. https://doi.org/10.46924/jihk.v7i2.366