MK Rejects Bid to Extend DPRD Members’ Terms Until 2031
The Constitutional Court (MK) has rejected a petition filed by Muhammad Zulfan Raghibie, M Khairu Mamnun and Jaif Saputra concerning the extension of the 2024–2029 term of regional council (DPRD) members until 2031. The Court said the petitioners lacked legal standing.
“Dismissed,” Chief Justice Suhartoyo said as he read out the ruling in the Court’s plenary courtroom in Central Jakarta on Thursday (29 October 2026).
Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra said there was no causal link between the petitioners’ status and the provisions they had challenged. The Court found no constitutional-rights injury in their petition.
“Likewise, the petitioners’ account of their constitutional right to vote is unconvincing. The provisions of Article 318(4) and Article 367(4) of Law No. 7/2014 do not prevent the petitioners from exercising their constitutional right to vote in elections, as citizens who meet the requirements,” he said.
Muhammad Zulfan Raghibie, M Khairu Mamnun and Jaif Saputra had filed a challenge to Law No. 17/2014 on the People’s Consultative Assembly, the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Council and Regional People’s Representative Councils (MD3). They asked the Court to extend the terms of DPRD members elected for 2024–2029 until 2031.
The petition was registered as case No. 374/PUU-XXIV/2026, according to detikcom on Wednesday (14 October). The first hearing was held to hear the petitioners’ arguments.
In their petition, they referred to Constitutional Court Decision No. 135/PUU/2024, which separated national and local elections. They said the ruling raised questions about the terms of provincial and regency or municipal DPRD members elected in the 2024 general election.
The petitioners argued that the terms of DPRD members elected in 2024 would end when members elected in 2029 took their oaths. However, they said, the Constitutional Court ruling—which allows a gap of up to two years and six months between national and local elections—could result in vacancies in regional councils.
“The absence of follow-up by the legislature to Constitutional Court Decision No. 135/2024 has not merely created technical issues concerning the terms of DPRD members; it has also created legal uncertainty in the administration of the state, contrary to the principle of the rule of law,” they said.
The petitioners argued that the lack of clear rules implementing the Court’s decision could cause problems for local government. They therefore asked the Court to amend the rules and extend the DPRD members’ terms until 2031.