Testing the Constitutional Court's Reasoning Regarding Diplomas, Graduation, and Educational Equivalence
Court decisions must be respected. However, respecting a decision does not mean ceasing to read and test its arguments. As a reference for future cases, the quality of the Constitutional Court’s reasoning must continue to be discussed academically.
This is what needs to be done regarding Constitutional Court Decision Number 01/PHPU.PRES-XXIV/2026, specifically concerning the educational requirements of Gibran Rakabuming Raka.
The issue is not as simple as the question of whether a diploma exists or not, but rather a more important question: “What is legally sufficient to prove that someone has ‘completed high school/vocational school or equivalent’ when their education was undertaken in a foreign education system and the Government has issued an Equivalence Certificate?”
Looking at the legislation, Article 169 letter r of the Election Law requires presidential and vice-presidential candidates to have “at least a high school, madrasah aliyah, vocational high school, madrasah aliyah vocational, or other equivalent school education.”
The explanation then provides an important provision: the equivalence of education to high school is determined by the Government and/or local governments based on the provisions of laws and regulations. Thus, the Election Law demonstrates an acknowledgement that the issue of “equivalence” requires assessment by government institutions.
Furthermore, Article 227 letter l regulates proof of graduation. This takes the form not only of a diploma but also a certificate of completion or other supporting documents. This section must be read in its entirety. The explanation of Article 227 emphasises that such “other supporting documents” must state graduation from an educational unit or programme recognised as equivalent to the completion of secondary education.
Therefore, there are three concepts that must be distinguished from the outset: educational qualification, proof of graduation, and educational equivalence.
The Election Law requires “completion or equivalent.” Proof of graduation can take several forms. Meanwhile, to determine equivalence, the Government assumes a direct role as per the Explanation of Article 169.
Minister of Education and Culture Regulation Number 29 of 2014 (Permendikbud 29/2014) does indeed mention diplomas, certificates, or diplomas. At this point, I believe we must also read the Court’s arguments fairly.
Article 1 number 7 of Permendikbud Number 29 of 2014 defines an Equivalence Certificate as a document stating that a diploma, certificate, or diploma obtained from an educational unit using an international curriculum or another country’s curriculum is equivalent to a diploma or STTB within the national education system.
Therefore, when the Court questions the existence of the diploma, certificate, or diploma that forms the basis of the equivalence, the question has a regulatory basis. Permendikbud 29/2014 indeed uses these three forms of graduation credentials as the objects of equivalence.
Thus, the appropriate criticism is not to say that the Constitutional Court “created” diploma requirements out of thin air. The legal issue arises thereafter.
Furthermore, reading the operational rules, during the hearing on 2 October 2026, the Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education explained that Permendikbud 29/2014 does not regulate all technical documents used in the assessment process in detail. Therefore, according to the Ministry, the requirements and mechanisms for equivalence must be read alongside the operational provisions applicable when the equivalence was performed, namely the Decree of the Director General of Primary and Secondary Education Number 33/MPK.D/KS/2018.
The Director General’s Decree certainly cannot be read as a regulation that overrides the Minister’s Regulation. The issue is not a conflict of the hierarchy of norms, but rather how both must be read together.
This is where a very important formulation emerges.
In the list of documents for equivalence services, it is stated: “diploma/diploma/certificate if the educational provider issues a diploma.” Additionally, there are transcripts, curriculum structures, report cards, school letters, and other documents.
The phrase “if the educational provider issues a diploma” should not be extrapolated too far. It does not automatically mean that without a diploma, certificate, or diploma, every application for equivalence can still be granted.
However, that phrase should also not be considered meaningless.
That phrase indicates that the operational rules for equivalence do indeed face the reality that foreign education systems do not always use nomenclature and document forms identical to the Indonesian system.
The question that should be answered subsequently is: Do these other documents merely complement a graduation certificate that remains mandatory, or, in certain circumstances, can they serve as part of the basis for assessment when foreign education systems use different forms of documentation?
What the Assessment Team Actually Does
This question becomes even more relevant when looking at what the Government actually did during the 2011 equivalence process.
The Ministry of Primary and Secondary Education explained before the Constitutional Court that the equivalence of foreign education is not a process of issuing a new diploma, nor is it an act of declaring someone has graduated from an Indonesian educational unit. Its essence is an administrative act by the Government to assess documents and learning outcomes obtained from a foreign education system, and then determine their equivalent in the national education system.
In Gibran’s case, after the application was submitted, the Assessment Team conducted document verification and an assessment of the substance of learning outcomes. The assessment was conducted on the entire educational history from Orchid Park Secondary School in Singapore and UTS Insearch in Australia. The team compared subjects, learning outcomes, and graduate competency standards, and determined there was alignment with the accounting and finance expertise programme at the vocational high school level.
This is important because it means that the Equivalence Certificate did not arise solely…