Publication Search

The president's prerogative is a form of power inherent in the president's position as head of state. One form of this prerogative is the granting of abolition, which is the abolition of legal proceedings against a person or group of people who are or will undergo judicial proceedings. However, in its implementation, the president's authority to grant abolition is not absolute, but is limited by the applicable legal provisions and constitutional mechanisms. This study aims to analyze the limits of the president's power in exercising the prerogative in the form of abolition and review the juridical aspects that govern the procedure and its considerations. The research method used is normative juridical research with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. Data sources are obtained from relevant laws and regulations, legal literature, and scientific works. The results of the study show that the president's authority in granting abolition is regulated in Article 14 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which requires the president to pay attention to the considerations of the House of Representatives (DPR). Thus, this authority is not an absolute prerogative, but is limited by the principle of checks and balances in the Indonesian constitutional system. The conclusion of this study emphasizes that the restriction is a form of constitutional supervision over the use of presidential power to remain in line with the principles of the rule of law and constitutional democracy

Demonstrations demanding the dissolution of the House of Representatives by 2025 highlight a crisis of public trust and serve as a key moment in Indonesia's political landscape. These protests have not only symbolic significance but also lead to elite repositioning, the temporary dismissal of several members, and the cessation of policy that increased benefits. This study examines how the crisis has prompted political institutional reconstruction and the role of civil society in influencing change. A descriptive qualitative approach was used, including literature studies, analysis of academic literature, official documents, and media reports. The findings indicate that actions by the House of Representatives, such as the rotation of Commission III leadership, member deactivation, and rejection of benefit increases, were primarily reactive to public pressure. The discussion reveals that while these actions reduce crisis escalation, they are cosmetic and do not address structural issues like legislative accountability and budget transparency. In conclusion, the 2025 protests provide an opportunity for civil society to engage politically outside elections, but the institutional changes made are short-term. Fundamental reform can only occur if civil movements remain consistent and if political parties and the government commit to reform.

This study examines the implementation of the legislative duties and functions of the House of Representatives of the Republic of Indonesia (DPR RI) during the 2019–2024 period. Legislative function, as stipulated in Article 20A of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, constitutes one of the core and most influential functions of the DPR, enabling it to affect various aspects of national governance. However, in practice, this function has not been carried out optimally. Legislative performance is evaluated not only in terms of the quantity of legislation produced but also in the quality of the laws enacted. Using a normative juridical research method, grounded in positivist legal theory. The findings indicate that throughout the 2019–2024 period, the DPR’s legislative performance has fluctuated and remained suboptimal. Of the 256 bills included in the National Legislative Program (Prolegnas), only 63 were enacted into law. Several inhibiting factors were identified, including the competency of members, lengthy decision-making procedures, political party composition, and limited public participation. This study underscores the importance of enhancing the capacity of DPR members through regular training and education. Greater transparency in the legislative process is also crucial to maintaining public trust. Furthermore, streamlining bill deliberation mechanisms and fostering inter-factional dialogue are essential strategies to accelerate consensus and improve legislative outcomes.

The phenomenon of the local Aceh party's victory in the 2024 legislative election demonstrates the success of political communication strategies employed by the elected members of the Aceh Regional House of Representatives. This study aims to analyze the political communication strategies used by local party members in winning the election and how these strategies build closeness with voters in Aceh. The research method is qualitative with a case study approach, involving in-depth interviews, observations, and document analysis related to political campaigns. The results indicate that a combination of interpersonal communication, utilization of social media, and integration of local cultural values are key to the success of the local party’s political communication strategy. This study contributes new insights by highlighting the importance of local wisdom-based political communication and the role of traditional and religious leaders in strengthening political support in a special autonomous region like Aceh. The findings can serve as a reference for developing more effective and contextual political communication strategies in regions with similar characteristics.

The Constitutional Court (MK) regarding the Election Law on the presidential and vice presidential nomination threshold. Since the presidential election was held directly, the issue of the threshold for nominating presidential and vice presidential candidates has always surfaced every time a presidential election is held. In 2004, for example, the presidential nomination threshold was 10 percent. This research is a juridical-normative research, namely a process to find legal rules, legal principles, and legal doctrines in order to answer the legal issues faced. The data was analyzed descriptively-qualitatively.The results of this study indicate that the Constitutional Court Decision Number 74/PUU-XVII/2020 concerning the presidential nomination threshold (Presidential Threshold) is one of the important decisions in the discourse of democracy in Indonesia. The following is an explanation of the Ratio Decidendi of the decision in relation to the concept of democracy: Constitutionality of the Presidential Threshold The Constitutional Court (MK) in its decision emphasized that the presidential threshold or presidential nomination threshold is constitutional. This means that the provisions regarding the threshold do not conflict with the 1945 Constitution. The Constitutional Court is of the opinion that the presidential threshold is an open legal policy (Open Legal Policy) which is the authority of the lawmakers, namely the House of Representatives (DPR) and the President. The purpose of the Presidential Threshold, the Constitutional Court explained that the purpose of the presidential threshold is to simplify the party system and the presidential system, as well as to create government stability. The Ratio Decidendi of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 74/Puu-XXII/2024, Number 87/Puu-XXII/2024, Number 129/Puu-XXI/2023, Number 131/Puu-XXI 2023 concerning the Presidential Nomination Threshold is the Presidential Threshold is constitutional and does not conflict with the principles of democracy.