KAJIAN GUGATAN PERSELISIHAN HASIL PEMILU KEPALA DAERAH: STUDI KASUS PUTUSAN NO. 235/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025

Disputes over the results of Regional Head Elections (Pilkada) are a crucial element in a democratic system that ensures electoral justice and the legitimacy of regional leadership. Constitutional Court Decision No. 235/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 serves as a concrete example of procedural law application in assessing the formal admissibility of election disputes. This study emphasizes the importance of understanding the Constitutional Court’s formal standards, particularly the vote margin threshold, which often becomes the main reason for inadmissibility. The lack of normative studies specifically analyzing decisions declaring petitions inadmissible (niet ontvankelijk verklaard) under the latest regulatory changes constitutes a research gap addressed here. The objective is to examine the Court’s legal reasoning in declaring petitions formally inadmissible and to analyze the legal implications for resolving Pilkada disputes. Employing normative legal research with statutory and conceptual approaches, the findings show that the Court strictly applies the vote margin threshold as a formal requirement. Failure to meet this criterion results in petitions being rejected without examining the substance. This decision sets a significant legal precedent for future Pilkada dispute resolution.
Keywords: Constitutional Court, Pilkada Dispute, Vote Margin, Inadmissible Decision