ANALISIS INKONSISTENSI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI TENTANG PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA HASIL PILKADA

ANALYSIS OF THE INCONSISTENCY OF THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT'S DECISION ON THE SETTLEMENT OF DISPUTES OVER REGIONAL HEAD ELECTION RESULTS

Perbedaan antara sistem pemilihan umum (Pemilu) dan pemilihan kepala daerah (Pilkada) bermula dari keputusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 97/PUU-XI/2013. Keputusan ini menyatakan bahwa Mahkamah Konstitusi tidak memiliki kewenangan untuk menangani sengketa hasil Pilkada, kecuali jika Badan Peradilan Khusus belum terbentuk. Namun, pertanyaannya adalah apakah Mahkamah Konstitusi masih berwenang untuk menangani sengketa hasil Pilkada setelah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/PUU-XX/2022, dan apakah perlu ada penyesuaian mengenai kewenangan tersebut dalam Undang-Undang Dasar 1945. Dalam konteks ini, pemahaman tentang makna Pemilu juga perlu dikaji pasca Putusan MK No. 85/PUU-XX/2022. Melalui pendekatan normatif dan dengan menggunakan sumber hukum primer dan sekunder, penelitian ini menyimpulkan bahwa setelah Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 85/PUU-XX/2022, perbedaan antara kedua rezim tersebut telah hilang, sehingga Mahkamah Konstitusi memiliki kewenangan untuk secara permanen menangani sengketa hasil Pilkada.

The difference between election (Pemilu) and regional head election (Pilkada) systems stems from Constitutional Court decision No. 97/PUU-XI/2013. This decision states that the Constitutional Court does not have the authority to handle disputes over election results, unless a Specialized Judicial Body has not been established. However, the question is whether the Constitutional Court is still authorized to handle disputes over election results after Constitutional Court Decision Number 85/PUU-XX/2022, and whether there needs to be an adjustment regarding this authority in the 1945 Constitution. In this context, the understanding of the meaning of elections also needs to be studied after Constitutional Court Decision No. 85/PUU-XX/2022. Through a normative approach and by using primary and secondary legal sources, this study concludes that after Constitutional Court Decision No. 85/PUU-XX/2022, the distinction between the two regimes has disappeared, so that the Constitutional Court has the authority to permanently handle disputes over election results.

Keywords: Constitutional Court, Election, Regional Head Election, , the Special Judicial Body