{
    "success": true,
    "data": {
        "id": 1711978,
        "msgid": "rational-threshold-functional-parliament-1777600345",
        "date": "2026-05-01 08:00:00",
        "title": "Rational Threshold, Functional Parliament",
        "author": "Ferril Dennys",
        "source": "KOMPAS",
        "tags": "",
        "topic": "Politics",
        "summary": "The debate on Indonesia's parliamentary threshold has resurfaced amid plans to amend the election law, shifting focus from mere percentages to designing a constitutionally sound and institutionally rational system. Proposing a move from vote percentage to seat-based thresholds could address political fragmentation, enhancing parliamentary functionality by reducing small, ineffective parties that hinder decision-making and policy quality. This evolution aligns with Constitutional Court rulings emphasising rational and proportional criteria, aiming to balance representation with legislative efficiency.",
        "content": "<p>The debate on the parliamentary threshold has regained momentum in\nplans to amend the election law. Public discourse has tended to focus on\nnumbers\u2014whether 4 per cent is sufficient or needs to be raised. However,\nsuch an approach has yet to touch on the more fundamental issue: how to\ndesign a threshold that is not only constitutionally valid but also\ninstitutionally rational. Within the framework of the 1945 Constitution\nof the Republic of Indonesia, particularly Article 1(2) on popular\nsovereignty and Article 22E on general elections, the design of the\nelectoral system is part of open legal policy. The state has room to\ndetermine the most suitable model as long as it continues to guarantee\nthe principles of popular sovereignty and fair representation. It is in\nthis context that the idea of shifting the threshold from a vote\npercentage basis to a seat basis becomes relevant. It offers a more\noperational approach, while also addressing the real institutional needs\nof parliament. Normatively, the current parliamentary threshold is\nregulated in Law No.\u00a07 of 2017 on Elections, which sets 4 per cent of\nthe national vote as the requirement for political parties to obtain\nseats in the DPR. However, developments in jurisprudence show that this\nfigure is not absolute. In Constitutional Court Decision\nNo.\u00a0116\/PUU-XXI\/2023, the Constitutional Court affirmed that determining\nthe threshold must be based on rational considerations, proportional,\nand supported by adequate studies. Thus, the paradigm shift from vote\npercentage to number of seats is not a deviation, but part of\nconstitutional evolution in electoral system design. The experience of\nelections over the past two decades shows that a vote percentage-based\nthreshold has not fully resolved the issue of political fragmentation.\nParliament remains filled with many parties with relatively small\nstrengths, so the decision-making process is often stalled. This\nfragmentation is not merely a matter of the number of parties, but also\nconcerns the effectiveness of the legislative body\u2019s work. Many parties\nare formally present in parliament, but substantively lack sufficient\ncapacity to contribute to the legislative process or oversight. In\npractice, this condition prolongs the political process, increases\ntransaction costs, and has the potential to lower the quality of public\npolicy. Thus, the problem faced is not only representation, but also\nfunctionality.<\/p>",
        "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/rational-threshold-functional-parliament-1777600345",
        "image": ""
    },
    "sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
    "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}