There comes a time when a nation must ensure that political contests\nhave an end point. Elections are held, objections are examined, rulings\nare delivered, and then the government gets to work.<\/p>\n
That certainty allows people to organise their lives and the state to\nfulfil its responsibilities. If every result is continually treated as\nprovisional, it is society as a whole that ultimately loses its\nbearings.<\/p>\n
That is why I take seriously Denny Indrayana\u2019s statement that, if\nGibran is not removed, President Prabowo could instead face removal.<\/p>\n
When such a statement is made by a constitutional law expert, the\npublic may accept it as an explanation of how the Constitution\nworks.<\/p>\n
Yet academic authority does not, by itself, give a conclusion a\nconstitutional basis.<\/p>\n
It must be examined firmly, particularly when an interpretation of a\nConstitutional Court (MK) ruling develops into demands for impeachment,\nand then becomes a warning in a threatening tone against a President who\nhas not acceded to those demands. An expert\u2019s responsibility includes\nthe consequences of how they explain the law to the public.<\/p>\n
The starting point must be clear. In Case Number\n01\/PHPU.PRES-XXIV\/2026, the Constitutional Court\u2019s ruling stated that\nthe applicants\u2019 petition was inadmissible because they lacked legal\nstanding.<\/p>\n
The case concerned a dispute over election results, not a review of\nthe substance of a law. The Constitutional Court did not issue a ruling\nannulling Gibran\u2019s office, let alone order the President to dismiss\nhim.<\/p>\n
The Court\u2019s ruling establishes what was decided in response to the\npetition submitted. The first step in respecting a ruling is to accept\nits legal consequences accurately.<\/p>\n
In this case, the request for annulment was not granted. The\nVice-President\u2019s position was not invalidated by the ruling. No one has\nthe authority to add a dismissal order that the Court did not issue.<\/p>\n
It is true that the Court\u2019s reasoning addressed questions concerning\nevidence of Gibran\u2019s education and referred to the jurisdiction of other\ninstitutions under the Constitution. That reasoning must be read.<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/democracy-has-rules-and-a-timetable-1792777847", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }