The process of appointing Adies Kadir as a Constitutional Court (MK) judge candidate by Indonesia's DPR has been deemed compliant with legal and constitutional standards. Constitutional law experts confirm that the mechanism is clearly outlined in the 1945 Constitution. The switch from Inosentius Samsul to Adies Kadir is also legally justified.
Jakarta, VIVA – The appointment of Adies Kadir as a Constitutional Court (MK) judge candidate nominated by Indonesia's House of Representatives (DPR) has been assessed as legal and constitutional by constitutional law experts. Muhammad Rullyandi from the Faculty of Law at Universitas Jayabaya states that the mechanism for nominating MK judges is strictly regulated in the 1945 Constitution, particularly Article 24C paragraphs 3, 4, and 6. This provision stipulates that the nine MK justices are nominated by the DPR, the President, and the Supreme Court, with three from each institution.
"The selection of MK judges through the DPR is a legal, constitutional mechanism clearly outlined in the 1945 Constitution," Rullyandi told reporters on Saturday, January 31, 2026.
The switch from Inosentius Samsul to Adies Kadir occurred because Samsul was assigned a new position, approved by the DPR in a plenary session on August 21, 2025. This change remains within the nomination deadline of February 3, 2026. The DPR then conducted a fit and proper test on January 26, 2026, followed by Adies Kadir presenting his vision and mission. The results were approved by Commission III of the DPR and ratified in a plenary session on January 27, 2026.
All stages adhere to the 1945 Constitution, Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court (amended by Law No. 7 of 2020), the MD3 Law, and DPR Regulation No. 1 of 2020 (amended 2025). Expert Satya Arinanto adds that the appointment has no legal flaws and fits within Indonesia's state system.
"Constitutionally, the filling of MK judge positions is assigned to three state institutions," Satya said on Friday, January 30, 2026. He emphasizes that Adies Kadir's political background does not undermine MK independence, citing examples like Mahfud MD and Arsul Sani previously nominated by the DPR. Independence is determined by personal integrity, intellectual capacity, and adherence to the oath of office.
This process demonstrates the DPR's commitment to meeting requirements of integrity, impeccable character, and constitutional expertise for MK judge candidates.
