Legal Literacy - This article discusses the Dissenting Opinion of the Constitutional Court Decision by Constitutional Justices Saldi Isra, Wahiduddin Adams, Arief Hidayat, and Suhartoyo, related to the Constitutional Court's decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 regarding Article 169 of Law 7/2017. Learn about the debate surrounding the requirements for presidential and vice-presidential candidates through this article.

Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra

Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra provided a dissenting opinion on the Constitutional Court Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 regarding the interpretation of the norm in Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017. He expressed his rejection of the petition (dissenting opinion) and stated that the Court should have rejected the petition. Saldi Isra also provided a more detailed understanding of how the Constitutional Court's decision-making process relates to this norm, including changes in the composition of the Justices involved in related cases. He also outlined the differences of opinion among the Justices in the Constitutional Court, particularly regarding the interpretation of the norm in Article 169 letter q of Law 7/2017. Some Justices interpreted this norm differently, especially in terms of what can be considered a "position elected through general elections including regional head elections." Saldi Isra also discussed how the…