Legal Literacy - The polemic surrounding the Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 has caused an uproar in society. This is because, after the decision of the Constitutional Court's Honorary Council (MKMK) was read, it became clear that there was a serious ethical violation in handling the material review of Article 169 letter q Law Number 7 of 2017. The effort to annul the Constitutional Court's decision regarding the age limit for presidential and vice-presidential candidates is in "injury time." Even the General Election Commission (KPU) has already determined the presidential and vice-presidential candidates to compete in the 2024 Presidential Election.

The Urgency of Reviewing Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 and the Authority of the Constitutional Court

The urgency of review The formal review of this Decision is an appropriate consideration as a legal remedy so as not to create prolonged legal uncertainty. Formal review of Constitutional Court Decision No. 90/PUU-XXI/2023 is due to the fact that the review process is based on a conflict of interest on the part of the Former Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Anwar Usman.

One of the authorities possessed by the Constitutional Court as stipulated in Article 10 paragraph (1) letter a of Law Number 24 of 2003 concerning the Constitutional Court is “To review laws against the 1945 Constitution of the State of the Republic of Indonesia.” The Constitutional Court's decision has the same standing as a Law, meaning that there is a wide opportunity to annul the decision.