THE CONSTITUTIONAL COURT AS GUARDIAN OF THE CONSTITUTION: A REVIEW OF THE DYNAMICS AND IMPLICATIONS OF JUDICIAL REVIEW DECISIONS

Abstract

Abstract The Constitutional Court is frequently understood as the guardian of the constitution, tasked with ensuring that every state action and every product of legislation remains consistent with the nation's foundational principles. This role is not merely normative but reflects a constitutional mandate directed toward the preservation of constitutional supremacy. This article examines the dynamics underlying the process of judicial review and the issuance of Constitutional Court decisions, the implications of such decisions for Indonesia's legal and constitutional system, and the effectiveness of the Constitutional Court in discharging its role as guardian of the constitution. The study employs a normative juridical method combining the statute approach and the conceptual approach, drawing on constitutional theory, in particular Hans Kelsen's account of the constitutional court as guardian of the constitution, together with scholarly literature and analysis of relevant decisions. The findings show that the trial process before the Constitutional Court reflects a complex interaction between the legal argumentation of the parties, judicial deliberation, and external social and political pressure, and that Constitutional Court decisions carry implications extending well beyond the specific norm under review, shaping the hierarchy of legislation, inter-institutional relations, the protection of citizens' constitutional rights, and the broader trajectory of democratic development. The article concludes that although the Constitutional Court possesses considerable normative and institutional capacity to guard constitutional supremacy, its effectiveness remains contingent on factors beyond its own control, including political pressure, public opinion, and the consistency with which other state institutions comply with its decisions, such that strengthening the guardian-of-the-constitution role requires sustained institutional reinforcement extending beyond the Court itself.