Constitutional Court Asked to Ban Family Members of the President from Contesting Presidential Elections

Two lawyers, Raden Nuh and Dian Amalia, have filed a judicial review of the Election Law with the Constitutional Court. They are requesting that the court prohibit family members of the incumbent president and vice president from running in presidential elections, whether as presidential or vice-presidential candidates.

The lawsuit, registered under number 81/PUU-XXXIV/2026 on Tuesday, February 24, 2026, challenges Article 169 of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning General Elections. This article outlines the requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates, including being Indonesian citizens, not having betrayed the country, and not having been convicted of a crime.

According to the petition, which can be accessed on the Constitutional Court’s official website, the petitioners argue that the requirements in Article 169 of the Election Law allow any incumbent president to nominate their children, siblings, family members, or close relatives as presidential or vice-presidential candidates in the presidential election in which the president is serving.

“If this happens, it is the same as negating the principle of legal objectivity, where it will inevitably create a situation in which the law is used as an instrument to perpetuate family power,” the petitioners stated in their argument.

Furthermore, the petitioners argue that Article 169 of the Election Law also contradicts Article 28 D Paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, as it has the potential to create systemic inequality among presidential election candidates. The petitioners claim that candidates who are family members of the incumbent president or vice president automatically have access to state resources.

In their argument, the petitioners also state that the absence of a prohibition on family members of the president running in Article 169 of the Election Law violates the principle of the rule of law, which requires the state to limit power and prevent conflicts of interest.

According to the petitioners, in the realm of public law, a conflict of interest does not need to occur in fact to be considered harmful. “It is enough that the potential or appearance of a conflict of interest can undermine the legitimacy of the law,” they said.

Based on this, in their petition, the petitioners request that the Constitutional Court declare Article 169 of the Election Law to be in conflict with the 1945 Constitution and to have no binding legal force, unless it is interpreted as: “The requirements for nomination as president and/or vice president must be free from conflicts of interest arising from family relations with the incumbent President and/or Vice President.”

Editor’s Choice: Ethical Problem of Appointing Adies Kadir as Constitutional Judge