DIFERENSIASI REKOMENDASI DAN PUTUSAN BAWASLU: IMPLIKASI PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI 104/PUU-XXII/2025

Abstract

The enforcement of administrative violations in regional head elections (Pilkada) traditionally relies on the functional division between the Election Supervisory Body (Bawaslu) as the supervisory authority and the General Elections Commission (KPU) as the implementing body. However, recent developments in legal interpretation reveal a shift in the normative status of Bawaslu’s “recommendations,” which were originally administrative in nature, but increasingly perceived as carrying binding force similar to adjudicative decisions. This development intensified after the Constitutional Court Decision No. 104/PUU-XXII/2025, which affirmed that the results of Bawaslu’s administrative violation examinations are binding upon the KPU. This study employs a normative legal approach and case analysis, examining the construction of Bawaslu–KPU authority under Law No. 1 of 2015, Bawaslu Regulations No. 9 of 2020 and No. 9 of 2022, and their implications for legal certainty, institutional independence, and the protection of electoral participants’ rights.

The findings indicate that the strengthened binding force of Bawaslu’s products improves the effectiveness of electoral oversight; however, it also creates institutional tension due to the absence of adequate normative reconstruction within the current legal framework. The lack of a comprehensive adjudicative mechanism and the absence of an administrative appeal process pose risks to the principles of due process and fair hearing. A case study in Southwest Papua demonstrates that unclear institutional boundaries directly affect candidate qualification processes and the legitimacy of election management in newly established autonomous regions. This research recommends revising Articles 139–140 of the Pilkada Law, establishing an administrative appeal mechanism, and reinforcing institutional coordination to ensure that the relationship between Bawaslu and KPU aligns with the principles of checks and balances and guarantees legal certainty in resolving administrative violations in Pilkada.