The Papuan People's Council and the Governor's Legislative Authority: A Study on the Harmonization of Special Regional Regulation Formulation

The unique design of Indonesia's Special Autonomy Law grants the Papuan People's Council the mandatory authority to approve Special Regional Regulations relating to the fundamental rights of the Indigenous Papuan People. This mechanism introduces a crucial dynamic to regional law-making, often placing the MRP's cultural authority in tension with the Governor's executive legislative power. The introduction highlights this tension, identifying the lack of a clear legal framework for managing the interplay between the MRP's cultural veto and the Governor's administrative requirements. The objective of this study is to juridically analyze the dual legislative powers and to formulate a comprehensive harmonization model that ensures Perdasus upholds OAP rights effectively. The methodology employed is normative legal research (doctrinal research), using the statute approach and conceptual approach to analyze primary legal materials, including the Special Autonomy Law and associated regulations, specifically focusing on the principles of asymmetric decentralization and institutional checks and balances. The conclusion affirms that the legislative process operates under an "asymmetric balance of power," where the MRP's refusal of approval constitutes a procedural flaw leading to the Perdasus's invalidity. A significant normative gap exists concerning dispute resolution mechanisms. To rectify this, the study proposes a Procedural and Substantive Harmonization Model requiring mandatory Cultural Impact Assessments and clear timelines. The novelty of this research lies in its proposed Integrated Dual-Approval Harmonization Model, which moves beyond traditional administrative procedures. Unlike existing frameworks that rely on informal coordination, this model introduces a Binding Cultural Impact Assessment (CIA) and a Joint-Institutional Mediation Phase led by a specialized legal tribunal. This ensures that the distinction between political approval (Governor-DPRP) and cultural approval (MRP) is procedurally codified, eliminating the "normative vacuum" during legislative deadlocks. By codifying these specific harmonization pathways, the proposed model provides legal certainty and reinforces the protective function of Special Autonomy for the OAP.