This study evaluates the regional head age limit policy in Indonesia following the Supreme Court Decision Number 23 P/HUM/2024 through a normative juridical analysis. The age limit policy, governed by Law No. 10 of 2016, aims to ensure capable leadership by imposing a minimum age requirement for candidates. However, the Supreme Court's decision raises questions about the policy's alignment with constitutional principles of equality, non-discrimination, and democratic participation. The analysis examines statutory regulations, legal principles, and comparative insights from other democratic countries to understand the policy's rationale and implications. Findings highlight the need for a balanced approach that ensures legal consistency and promotes inclusive, effective regional governance. Recommendations include lowering the minimum age requirement, implementing a flexible age range, and incorporating empirical evidence to refine the policy, ensuring it serves the principles of justice, democratic participation, and effective governance.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Hamid et al. (2024) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: