Constitutional Court Rejects Permanent Prohibition on Former Convicts Running in Elections
The Constitutional Court (MK) has wholly rejected a petition concerning the permanent prohibition on candidacy for former convicts seeking to participate in elections or local government elections. This is set out in Constitutional Court Decision No. 48/PUU-XXIV/2026.
The petition was filed by students Yusron Ashalirrohman, Alyssa Rizqia Haris, Roby Nurdiansyah, Syahrulagus Rishman Edo Putra, and Galih Ramadan.
The petition tested the constitutionality of Article 182 letter g and Article 240 paragraph (1) letter g of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law) and Article 7 paragraph (2) letter g of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors (Local Election Law) against the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.
“Deciding to reject the petition of the petitioners in its entirety,” Constitutional Court Chief Justice Suhartoyo announced the decision in the Constitutional Court Hearing Room on Monday, 16 March.
In its considerations, the Court stated that the demand to specify certain types of crimes, such as corruption, terrorism, treason, and crimes against state security, did not need to be added further.
This is because the current candidacy requirements are already deemed to automatically encompass these serious types of criminal offences.
“In fact, this has been accommodated through the candidacy requirement point i, ‘never having been convicted based on a court decision that has acquired permanent legal force for committing a criminal act threatened with imprisonment of 5 years or more, except for convicts who commit negligence offences and political offences in the sense of an act declared as a criminal act in positive law only because the perpetrator has a political view different from the ruling regime’,” said Constitutional Judge Adies Kadir.
Furthermore, the Court has also given confirmation in Constitutional Court Decision No. 32/PUU-XXIII/2025 that additional requirements have been provided for former convicts wishing to run for public office. These require completion of the entire sentence and a waiting period of five years after completion of the sentence.
Regarding the petition for certain types of criminal acts to be specifically excluded, the Court deemed that this would actually narrow the meaning of previous Constitutional Court decisions.
Additionally, the Court also considered the possibility of other types of criminal acts in the future that carry similar penalties.
In the context of candidacy, the Court assessed that looser requirements are necessary to protect the constitutional rights of citizens in obtaining equal opportunity in government.
This includes former convicts who have served their sentences and met the waiting period as stipulated in the Court’s previous decisions.
Meanwhile, regarding removal from office, the Court distinguished between candidacy rules and dismissal rules. Regarding the dismissal of regional heads embroiled in cases, the focus is no longer on the individual official’s rights, but rather on protecting the interests of the general public.
The Court also rejected the petitioners’ argument requesting that former convicts of corruption, terrorism, treason, and crimes against state security have their political rights revoked to become members of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representative Council, provincial legislatures, and as regional heads and deputy regional heads.
The removal of these political rights is deemed to contradict the principle of human rights, particularly every citizen’s right to obtain equal opportunity.