Citizens Sue Election Law, Request Constitutional Court to Ban Family Members of President and Vice President from Running for Office

Two Indonesian citizens, Raden Nuh and Dian Amalia, have filed a lawsuit with the Constitutional Court challenging the Election Law. They are requesting that the court prohibit family members, both by blood and marriage, of the current President and Vice President from running for the same offices.

The lawsuit, registered under number 81/PUU-XXIV/2026, challenges Article 169 of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning General Elections (Election Law).

In their petition, the plaintiffs request that the Constitutional Court declare Article 169 of the Election Law inconsistent with the 1945 Constitution and that it should not be legally binding unless interpreted to mean that presidential and/or vice-presidential candidates must be free from conflicts of interest arising from family relationships with the current President and/or Vice President during the same term of office.

The plaintiffs argue that, as voters, they risk losing their freedom to independently choose their political preferences if candidates have family ties to the current President or Vice President.

“At the very least, the plaintiffs would be seen as giving legitimacy or agreeing with the practice of nepotism, which is a violation of applicable law, because in the presidential and vice-presidential candidate pair chosen by the plaintiffs, one of them is either the perpetrator or at least someone who benefits from the practice of nepotism,” as quoted in the petition on Wednesday, February 25, 2026.

The plaintiffs state that they, as voters, may not have the opportunity to freely choose their preferred presidential candidate if a family member of the President or Vice President is running. According to the plaintiffs, this would place them in a position of supporting the practice of nepotism.

“In a broad sense, nepotism essentially applies to very specific situations, namely when someone uses their position to gain an advantage, often in the form of a job for a family member,” they wrote.

They argue that although Article 169 of the Election Law contains various administrative and ethical requirements, ranging from age limits and legal records to loyalty to the constitution, there is no clause that explicitly regulates the prohibition of conflicts of interest based on family ties with the incumbent.