QUESTIONING THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION REGARDING AGE LIMIT OF PRESIDENTIAL AND VICE-PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES

This research is a response to the polemics and controversy over the Constitutional Court's decision in Indonesia, which is seen as failing to maintain its independence in deciding the minimum age limit for presidential and vice-presidential candidates. In this decision, the Constitutional Court is seen as having failed to preserve the dignity of a judicial institution that should be free from conflicts of interest and influence from any party in determining a decision. This research uses normative legal research methods with conceptual, statutory, and case approaches. The result of this study is that the decision of the constitutional court on the minimum age of presidential and vice presidential candidates is categorised as a decision based on conflicts of interest of several constitutional judges, in addition to the decision being read at an inappropriate time and momentum, including constitutional judges in exercising their authority there is no external supervision. The three things mentioned above are the forerunners of the failure of the Constitutional Court to maintain its independence and integrity. As a result of this failure, the level of public trust in this institution has decreased.