Constitutional courts and law reform: a case study of Indonesia

This research investigates the constitutional practice in Indonesia through the Indonesian Constitutional Court (ICC). It has played a significant role in safeguarding the Indonesian constitution, indeed has acted more supreme than the constitution itself, through the approach known as the Ultra Petita. This issue requires a research and recommendation for law reform in the ICC. This topic has been analysed and compared from different angles, including other country experiences, ASEAN countries, and the ICC essential role in autonomous provinces. The research applies several approaches. Firstly the comparative constitutional approach analyses the text of the constitution and how it is interpreted judicially. Supporting this approach, the researcher also uses the black-letter and socio legal approach, and observed personally the operations of the ICC in Indonesia, understand how the ICC operates and produces judgments. The research has found that the ICC judges have been given authority to expand their jurisdictions by the constitutional system, which implies that some judgments have potentially violated the constitution itself. For the time being, regulations do not prevent ICC judges in making the Ultra Petita, because of the articles in the Constitution arranging the ICC. The nine members of the ICC have also had difficulty in managing its. The research concludes that the ICC needs change, particularly through the amendment the constitution, namely; 1. The prohibition of judging beyond its jurisdictions, such as Ultra Petita; 2. Centralizing the judicial review of regulations under ICC jurisdictions instead of spreading in several states organ; 3.Creating the mechanism of asking for constitutional opinion; 4. Adding more judges, 5. Arranging all election mechanism, and 5. The supervising state organ