{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1984095,
        "msgid": "constitutional-court-prohibits-president-from-unilateral-changes-to-state-budget-experts-upholding-1789570316",
        "date": "2026-09-16 20:28:00",
        "title": "Constitutional Court Prohibits President from Unilateral Changes to State Budget, Experts: Upholding Constitutional Mandate",
        "author": "Gana Buana",
        "source": "MEDIA_INDONESIA",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Legal",
        "summary": "The Constitutional Court has ruled that the government cannot unilaterally alter central expenditure allocations within the State Budget (APBN) without parliamentary approval. Legal experts have praised the decision, noting that it reinforces the principle of checks and balances and upholds the constitutional mandate of the 1945 Constitution.",
        "content": "<p>The Constitutional Court (MK) has emphasised that the government\ncannot unilaterally change central expenditure allocations within the\nState Budget (APBN). This ruling mandates that any changes to the\ndetailed expenditure budget according to its function must obtain the\napproval of the House of Representatives (DPR).<\/p>\n<p>Umbu Rauta, Professor of Constitutional Law at Satya Wacana Christian\nUniversity (UKSW) Salatiga, appreciated the Court\u2019s move. According to\nhim, this decision is vital to reaffirm the mandate of Article 23 of the\n1945 Constitution, which stipulates that the determination and amendment\nof the APBN must be discussed jointly between the President and the\nDPR.<\/p>\n<p>\u201cThe MK decision deserves appreciation as it strives to protect and\naffirm the constitutional mandate. The requirement for this to take the\nlegal form of a law ensures that the people must participate in\ndiscussions and grant approval through parliament,\u201d Umbu Rauta stated in\nJakarta on Wednesday (16\/09\/2026).<\/p>\n<p>Decision Number 100\/PUU-XXIV\/2026 is the result of a material review\nof Law Number 17 of 2025 regarding the 2026 Fiscal Year APBN.\nConstitutional Judge Arsul Sani stated that the phrase in Article 8,\nparagraph (5), which allowed changes to be regulated merely through\nPresidential Regulations (Perpres), is conditionally unconstitutional.\nThe Court assessed that such a provision ignores the principle of checks\nand balances.<\/p>\n<p>In addition to central expenditure, the Court also highlighted the\nallocation of Village Funds. Constitutional Judge Adies Kadir emphasised\nthat the central government does not have full authority to determine\nthe direction of village fund usage without involving village\ngovernments in its implementation, in order to support sustainable\ndevelopment at the village level.<\/p>\n<p>Regarding emergency conditions or economic crises, the Court\nacknowledged the need for budgetary flexibility for rapid response.\nHowever, the Court emphasised that such authority is not limitless.\nAdjustments to the APBN structure during a crisis still require\noversight and approval from the DPR RI.<\/p>\n<p>On the other hand, Umbu Rauta reminded the DPR to continue exercising\nits budgetary function independently, even though the majority of\nfactions are part of the government-supporting coalition. He expressed\nhope that people\u2019s representatives would remain critical and prioritise\npublic interests over practical political interests.<\/p>\n<p>This lawsuit was previously filed by the MBG Watch civil society\ncoalition. They argued that the regulations in the 2026 Fiscal Year APBN\nLaw previously provided too much discretionary space for the executive\nto overhaul national budget priorities without adequate legislative\ncontrol.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/constitutional-court-prohibits-president-from-unilateral-changes-to-state-budget-experts-upholding-1789570316",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}