Constitutional Court Rules KPK Leaders Do Not Need to Resign from Previous Positions
A petition registered under number 70/PUU-XXIV/2026 was filed by Marina Ria Aritonang (petitioner I), Syamsul Jahidin (petitioner II), and Ria Merryanti (petitioner III). The petitioners argued that the provisions of Article 29 letters i and j of the KPK Law contradict their constitutional rights as guaranteed under Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 27 paragraph (3), and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.
The petitioners challenged the phrase in Article 29 letter i of the KPK Law, which requires prospective KPK leaders to “resign from structural positions and/or other positions while serving as members of the Corruption Eradication Commission.” They contended that the phrase “resign” in the article creates multiple interpretations and could lead to potential conflicts of interest.
The text of Article 29 in the KPK Law reads as follows:
Article 29
To be appointed as a KPK Leader, one must meet the following requirements:
Indonesian citizen;
Devout to the Almighty God;
Physically and mentally healthy;
Holding a bachelor’s degree in law or another bachelor’s degree with expertise and at least 15 (fifteen) years of experience in law, economics, finance, or banking;
At least 50 (fifty) years old and at most 65 (sixty-five) years old during the selection process;
Never committed disgraceful acts;
Competent, honest, with high moral integrity, and good reputation;
Not a member of any political party;
Resign from structural positions and/or other positions while serving as a member of the Corruption Eradication Commission;
Not practise their profession while serving as a member of the Corruption Eradication Commission; and
Declare their assets before and after taking office in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
However, the Constitutional Court held a different view. The Court opined that the KPK is a non-structural independent institution established by law, so the position of KPK leader falls under the category of positions that can apply a temporary suspension mechanism.
The Court gave an example of active police members or officers under Article 28 of Law Number 2 of 2002 on the Indonesian National Police (Law 2/2002), which requires active police officials to resign or retire from police service if they hold positions outside the police that are unrelated to policing.
“Regarding this matter, the obligation to resign or retire as mentioned, according to the Court, is due to the nature of the position to be filled by the police official not always related to periodicity, whereas, as considered above, the position of KPK leader is bound by a limited period,” said MK Justice Guntur Hamzah during the hearing on Tuesday (29/4/2026).
The Court also assessed that the Indonesian legal system has accommodated the objectives of preventing conflicts of interest and dual positions through mechanisms regulated by each institution. Therefore, the Court held a different view from the petitioners.
“If the formulation requested by the petitioners in their petition is granted as requested, it would instead ignore that differentiation and create disharmony among various laws and regulations,” said Guntur.
“Thus, based on the elaboration of the considerations in that decision, in this context, the use of the word ‘nonaktif’ (inactive) is more appropriate, concrete, and provides legal certainty, as it allows adjustment of meaning according to each legal regime. For instance, temporary dismissal for civil servants and resignation or retirement for police members/officers, thus still ensuring no conflicts of interest and dual positions without sacrificing the principles of proportionality and legal certainty,” he added.
The Court also emphasised that the phrase “nonaktif” means not carrying out duties, tasks, functions, authority, rank, or profession from the original institution, including other administrative actions while serving as KPK leader.
Therefore, the Court decided to change the phrase “resign” in Article 29 letter i to “nonaktif dari” (inactive from).
“Ruling, granting the petitioners’ request in part. Declaring the word ‘resign’ in Article 29 letter i of Law Number 19 of 2019 on the Second Amendment to Law Number 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission to be contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and to have no binding legal force conditionally insofar as it is not interpreted as ‘nonaktif dari’,” stated MK Chief Justice Suhartoyo.
The Court also changed the phrase “not practise” in Article 29 letter j to “nonaktif dari”.
“Declaring the phrase ‘not practise’ in Article 29 letter j of Law 19 of 2019 on the Second Amendment to Law Number 30 of 2002 on the Corruption Eradication Commission to be contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and to have no binding legal force conditionally insofar as it is not interpreted as ‘nonaktif dari’,” Suhartoyo emphasised.