The Legal Standing of Constitutional Court Decisions on the Unconstitutionality of Special Insult Provisions in the Indonesian Criminal Code

This article examines the legal standing of Indonesian Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi) decisions that declare special insult provisions of the Criminal Code unconstitutional, and the consequences of those decisions for a legislature that later re-enacts similar norms. Using a normative-juridical method with statutory, case and conceptual approaches, it analyses Decision No. 013-022/PUU-IV/2006 (insulting the President and Vice President), Decision No. 6/PUU-V/2007 (hostility towards the government), and Decisions No. 275/PUU-XXIII/2025 and No. 282/PUU-XXIII/2025 on Law No. 1 of 2023. The article argues that such decisions carry three layers of legal effect: a formal effect that removes the annulled article from the legal order erga omnes; a material effect, arising from the ratio decidendi, that restricts re-enactment of norms with the same substance; and an institutional effect that obliges lawmakers to respect the Court's reading of the Constitution. The 2026 decisions show that the Court now tests substance rather than article numbers, yet they also expose a tension: insult of the President survived as a complaint-based offence, whereas insult of the government and state institutions was annulled in full. The article concludes that a clearer doctrine on the binding force of the ratio decidendi is needed.