Controversy Over the Constitutional Court's Decision on Judicial Review of Norms of the Laws, which Proven Against the Constitution

In 2024, the Constitutional Court (MK) made two controversial decisions in a short period. There are the MK Decision No.90/PUU-XXI/2023 and MK Decision No.60/PUU-XXII/2024. The first decision is related to the requirements for nominating the Republic of Indonesia Vice President, and the second refers to the requirements for nominatingRegional Head Leaders. This article is not intended to discuss the contents of the two decisions but to describe one ofseveral initial concepts and purposes of establishing the Constitutional Court, which is that the Constitutional Court shall be the guardian of the Constitution, that it will only conduct a review of the norm(s) in the law that against the norm in Constitutions. This will give the Constitutional Court the power to judicially review all promulgated laws so that the laws may not contain norms that will go against the norms in the Indonesian Constitution. The research in this article is normative legal research. The study found that, in practice, the Constitutional Court has acted beyond its authority by creating new norms by giving new interpretations to the existing norms in the laws it declared unconstitutional.