Medan, North Sumatra— From Centralized Power to a More Balanced System. The research conducted by Ervina Sari Sipahutar together with Muthia Syafa Ramdhani Lubis, Zahwa Soraya, Marsya Oktaviani Harahap, Sifa Maulida Bangun, and Niha Sry Asyh Gultom from Universitas Al-Azhar Medan was published in the Contemporary Journal of Applied Sciences (CJAS), Volume 4, Issue 2, February 2026.
The study examines how the 1999–2002 constitutional amendments strengthened democracy, limited presidential power, and established a more balanced system of checks and balances within Indonesia’s constitutional framework.
Fundamental
Changes Highlighted by the Researchers
The study applied a qualitative method using a library research approach. The authors reviewed academic literature, journal articles, and constitutional studies to assess how the amendments transformed Indonesia’s governance system.
Key
reforms identified in the study include:
1.
The MPR No Longer the Highest State Institution
The
MPR’s position was equalized with other state institutions. This ended the
hierarchical structure that previously placed it above all other branches of
government.
2.
Strengthening of the DPR
The
Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat (DPR) gained stronger authority in legislation,
budgeting, and oversight. The president can no longer exercise dominant
lawmaking power without parliamentary approval.
3.
Presidential Term Limits
The
president is now limited to a maximum of two terms, preventing long-term
concentration of executive power.
4.
Direct Presidential Elections
The
president and vice president are elected directly by the people, increasing
political legitimacy and public accountability.
5.
Establishment of the Constitutional Court
The
Mahkamah Konstitusi was created with the authority to review laws against the
Constitution, resolve disputes between state institutions, and adjudicate
election disputes.
6.
Formation of the DPD
The
Dewan Perwakilan Daerah (DPD) was established to strengthen regional
representation within the national system.
According to the authors, the Constitutional Court represents a milestone in enforcing constitutional supremacy and preventing abuse of power by both executive and legislative branches.
Executive–Legislative–Judicial
Relations
The
study also examines the transformation in relations among the executive,
legislative, and judicial branches. After the amendments, the relationship
between the president, the DPR, and judicial institutions was redesigned within
a checks-and-balances framework.
The
president remains head of government but no longer holds absolute authority in
lawmaking. Cooperation with the DPR is constitutionally required. Meanwhile,
the DPR exercises political oversight through interpellation rights, inquiry
rights, and the right to express opinions.
The
Constitutional Court strengthens the judiciary by reviewing legislation and
safeguarding constitutional compliance. This mechanism provides corrective
space if statutory laws contradict constitutional principles.
However, the researchers note that in practice, these institutional relationships are still influenced by political configurations and elite interests. While the constitutional framework has changed normatively, implementation does not always fully reflect reform ideals.
Post-Amendment
Challenges
More
than two decades after the constitutional reforms, several challenges persist.
The study identifies major concerns, including:
- Overlapping authority among state
institutions
- Limited legislative power of the DPD
- Coalition politics affecting the DPR’s
oversight effectiveness
- Oligarchic influence and money politics
within an open democratic system
Constitutional
legitimacy also remains an issue. The amendment process, though conducted by
the MPR, involved limited direct public participation. As a result, gaps remain
between constitutional norms and public understanding.
The research team from Universitas Al-Azhar Medan stresses that textual reform alone is insufficient. Strong political culture, institutional integrity, and civic constitutional education are essential to ensuring democratic consolidation.
Implications
for Policy and Education
The
findings carry broad implications for policymakers, academics, and the public.
For
government and parliament, the study serves as a reminder that constitutional
design must be supported by ethical political practice.
For
educational institutions, the research enriches scholarship in Indonesian
constitutional law and provides a reference point for understanding the
evolution of Indonesia’s presidential system.
For
citizens, understanding constitutional reform enhances awareness of rights and
responsibilities within a democratic framework.
Ervina Sari Sipahutar and her colleagues conclude that Indonesia’s post-amendment constitutional system represents a long-term evolutionary process. The reforms laid the groundwork for a more transparent and accountable government, but institutional strengthening and political ethics remain ongoing priorities.
Author
Profile
- Ervina Sari Sipahutar-
- Muthia Syafa Ramdhani Lubis- Universitas Al-Azhar Medan
- Zahwa Soraya- Universitas Al-Azhar Medan
- Marsya Oktaviani Harahap- Universitas Al-Azhar Medan
- Sifa Maulida Bangun- Universitas Al-Azhar Medan
- Niha Sry Asyh Gultom- Universitas Al-Azhar Medan
Research
Source
Sipahutar,
E. S., Lubis, M. S. R., Soraya, Z., Harahap, M. O., Bangun, S. M., &
Gultom, N. S. A. (2026). Indonesian Constitutional System Post-Amendment of
the 1945 Constitution. Contemporary Journal of Applied Sciences (CJAS),
Vol. 4 No. 2, 95–102.
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55927/cjas.v4i2.129
URL: https://ntlformosapublisher.org/index.php/cjas
0 Komentar