Judicial Competence and Consistency in the Constitutional Court’s Decision about Open List Proportional Representation

The Constitutional Court often creates new norms that affect the electoral system. Still, sometimes, the Constitutional Court decides cases examining the Election Law as an open legal policy. Therefore, the question is whether the Constitutional Court decides the case in accordance with its competence and consistency in determining cases No. 22-24/PUU-VI/2008 and No. 114/PUU-XX/2022 related to the application of an open list proportional representation system in the DPR and DPRD elections. The purpose of this study is to examine further the competence and consistency of the Constitutional Court in deciding the two cases. This research uses doctrinal research methods. The approaches used in this research include statute, conceptual, historical, and comparative approaches related to the issues being studied. As a result of the study, it was found that the competence of the Constitutional Court in deciding cases No. 22-24/PUU-VI/2008 and No. 114/PUU-XX/2022 was in the context of exercising its authority to examine laws against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, not as a determinant that regulates and determines which system is most appropriate to be used in the electoral system in Indonesia. The Constitutional Court showed its consistency in deciding the two cases. In its ratio decidendi, the Constitutional Court uses Article 22E paragraph (1) as the basis for its legal considerations so that elections are held with the widest possible participation of the people on the principles of democracy, direct, honest, and fair. This consistency is very important to maintain in order to preserve and sustain the reform mandate that has been crystallized in the 1945 Constitution.