Reconstruction of the Constitutional Court's Authority from a Negative Legislator to a Positive Legislator for the Sake of Substantive Justice
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46799/ijssr.v6i6.1413Keywords:
Positive Legislator, Negative Legislator, Substantive Justice, Reconstruction of Authority, Constitutional CourtAbstract
The Constitutional Court of Indonesia, initially established as a negative legislator following Hans Kelsen’s doctrine, possesses the authority to annul laws that contradict the 1945 Constitution. Over the past two decades, strict adherence to this model has revealed critical limitations, as annulment of statutory norms often generates legal vacuums, uncertainty, and potential infringement on citizens’ constitutional rights. This study addresses the evolving role of the Constitutional Court as a positive legislator to ensure substantive justice, particularly when legislative delays hinder the enforcement of citizens’ rights. The research aims to analyze the legal, philosophical, and sociological foundations underpinning this transformation and evaluate the mechanisms through which the Court addresses legal deadlocks. Employing normative legal research, the study examined secondary data from statutory laws, Constitutional Court decisions, legal literature, and scholarly analyses. Data were collected through systematic library research and document review, and analyzed qualitatively using descriptive, interpretative, and conceptual techniques. Findings indicate that the Court’s conditional constitutional and unconstitutional rulings enable the formulation of transitional norms, preventing legal chaos while safeguarding substantive justice. The reconstruction of the Court’s authority allows it to act as an emergency legislator, filling normative gaps without supplanting legislative power. This approach ensures citizens’ constitutional rights are effectively protected, demonstrating a balance between judicial activism and the principles of separation of powers.
References
Albert, R. (2015). How unwritten constitutional norms change written constitutions. Dublin University Law Journal, 38, 387.
Al-Dulaimi, A. O. (2018). From negative to positive legislator? Response to unconstitutional legislative omission as a case study in the changing roles of constitutional courts.
Blokker, P. (2024). Shifting constitutional imaginaries: Is the liberal-legal imaginary unsettled by populism? In Constitutional traditions and constitutional transitions (pp. 35–55). Edward Elgar Publishing.
David, B., Suharto, D. A., & Kwek, L. (2020). Polemik kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi menguji peraturan yang mengatur eksistensinya. Jurnal Hukum Adigama, 3(2), 112–137.
Firdaus, M. R., Hijriyah, R. L., & Huroiroh, E. (2023). Judicial preview sebagai mekanisme preventif terhadap ketidakpastian hukum akibat putusan inkonstitusional bersyarat oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi. Japhtn-Han, 2(2), 257–274.
Hasibuan, M. F., & Rumesten, I. (2023). Reorientasi kewenangan judicial review di Mahkamah Konstitusi berdasarkan prinsip supremasi konstitusi. Ekspose: Jurnal Penelitian Hukum dan Pendidikan, 22(2), 42–55.
Hesselink, M. W. (2016). The justice dimensions of the relationship between fundamental rights and private law. European Review of Private Law, 24(3/4).
Julian, T. M. (2025). Kewenangan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam melakukan judicial activism perspektif hukum progresif.
Muhammad, R. (2025). Peranan dan problematika Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai positive legislature di tengah regresi demokrasi Indonesia. Lex Renaissance, 10(1), 65–93.
Muttaqin, L., Enggarani, N. S., Nurhayati, N., Junaidi, M., & Febiyanti, N. (2025). Dialektika hubungan Mahkamah Konstitusi sebagai positive legislator dengan pembentuk undang-undang dalam proses legislasi. Dialektika, 11(2), 85–103.
Perju, V. (2024). Elements of a doctrine of transnational constitutional norms. International Journal of Constitutional Law, 22(2), 292–317.
Rabbani, R. A., Nurkania, R., Salimah, S., & Rosidin, U. (2026). Dampak putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam judicial review terhadap sistem hukum di Indonesia. Aladalah: Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora, 4(1), 197–212.
Rahman, F., & Wicaksono, D. A. (2024). Putusan bersyarat oleh Mahkamah Konstitusi: Karakteristik dan dinamika perkembangannya. UGM Press.
Safa’at, M. A. (2021). Conditional decisions as instrument guarding the supremacy of the constitution (analysis of conditional decisions of Indonesian Constitutional Court in 2003–2017).
Safta, M. (2012). Developments in the constitutional review: Constitutional court between the status of negative legislator and the status of positive co-legislator. Perspectives of Business Law Journal, 1, 1–20.
Schroeder, P. A. (2025). Putting courts under pressure: When lawmakers push constitutional boundaries. Oxford University Press.
Tanya, B. L., Simanjuntak, Y. N., & Hage, M. Y. (2019). Teori hukum: Strategi tertib manusia lintas ruang dan generasi. Genta Publishing.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Selviana Teras Widy Rahayu, Boy Nurdin
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
