Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams

In this opinion, Justice Adams conveyed several important points that led to the rejection of the petition filed. The main points in the opinion can be summarized as follows:
  1. The core issue of this case is the petitioner's desire that their political preferences in general elections not be hindered by age provisions in the law.
  2. The petitioner requested that the Court change the interpretation of Article 169 of the law to allow for alternative fulfillment of requirements as presidential and vice-presidential candidates.
  3. Justice Adams argued that the provision of age as one of the requirements for presidential candidates and vice-presidents is common in many countries and has been regulated in Indonesian history.
  4. Justice Adams considers that this requirement is an open legal policy that can be further regulated by lawmakers.
  5. He claims that some of the reasons mentioned in the opinion, such as "violating morality," "intolerable injustice," or "contradicting the principle of popular sovereignty," are only relevant in cases of legal norms that conflict with the constitution.
  6. Justice Adams argued that the regulation regarding the requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates should be the authority of lawmakers, not the Court's decision.
  7. If the Court grants this petition, it could be considered an intervention in the legislative and policy-making process.