When the Public Asks the Constitutional Court: Is Indonesia's Capital Jakarta or IKN?

The status of Indonesia’s national capital has become a question following the issuance of Law Number 21 of 2023 on the Nusantara Capital (IKN) and Law Number 151 of 2024 on the Special Province of Jakarta (DKJ). This question has culminated in several lawsuits at the Constitutional Court (MK), where individuals have filed material examinations against the IKN Law and the DKJ Law. One such case comes from Zulkifli, a doctor by profession, who filed a material examination of Articles 39 and 41 of the IKN Law in Case Number 71/PUU-XXIV/2026. However, in 2024, the DKJ Law was promulgated, which normatively revokes Jakarta’s status as the National Capital. Meanwhile, to date, the Presidential Decree as required by Articles 39 and 41 of the IKN Law has not been issued. Zulkifli assesses that the validity of the IKN Law and the DKJ Law, which hold equal standing, has created a disharmonious condition because, at the same time, Jakarta is no longer normatively declared as the capital. “To declare Articles 39 and 41 of Law Number 3 of 2022 on the State Capital as amended by Law Number 21 of 2023 to be contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and to have no binding legal force, unless interpreted as: ‘Until the Presidential Decision on the relocation of the National Capital is established, Jakarta remains positioned as the National Capital of the Republic of Indonesia to ensure certainty and continuity of the state structure.’ Or to declare Articles 39 and 41 of Law Number 3 of 2022 on the State Capital as amended by Law Number 21 of 2023 as conditionally constitutional, provided it is interpreted as: ‘There must be no vacancy in the constitutional status of the National Capital, and that until the constitutive requirement in the form of the Presidential Decision on the relocation of the National Capital is fulfilled, Jakarta remains valid and positioned as the National Capital of the Republic of Indonesia as a transitional arrangement,’” stated Zulkifli’s legal representative, Hadi Purnomo, during the hearing of Case Number 71/PUU-XXIV/2026 on Thursday (26/2/2026), quoted from the MKRI YouTube broadcast. Article II of the DKJ Law states: “The Presidential Decision regarding the relocation of the Capital of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia from the Special Capital Region Province of Jakarta to the Nusantara Capital shall be established subsequently.” The phrase “subsequently” in that article is considered multi-interpretable and does not provide a clear time limit regarding the establishment of the capital relocation. Asto states that the phrase “subsequently” in Article II of the DKJ Law is multi-interpretable and does not provide a clear time limit in issuing the Presidential Decree establishing the relocation of the national capital from Jakarta to IKN. “To declare Article II of Law Number 151 of 2024 on Amendments to Law Number 2 of 2024 on the Special Province of Jakarta (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2024 Number 399, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 7089) to be contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and to have no binding legal force unless interpreted as: ‘This Law shall come into force on the date of its promulgation. The Presidential Decision regarding the relocation of the Capital of the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia from the Special Capital Region Province of Jakarta to the Nusantara Capital shall be established before the Implementing Regulation as referred to in Article 71 of Law Number 2 of 2024 on the Special Province of Jakarta (State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia of 2024 Number 76, Supplement to the State Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 6913) is established,’” stated Asto while reading the petitum of Case Number 38/PUU-XXIV/2026, on Thursday (29/1/2026).