PROCEDURAL ASYMMETRY IN CONSTITUTIONAL COURT DECISION NO. 01/PHPU.PRES-XXIV/2026: RECONSTRUCTION OF THE TIME FRAME AND LEGAL STATUS

Abstract

The application of procedural law in presidential election disputes requires a balance between procedural certainty and access to constitutional justice. This issue arises in Constitutional Court Decision Number 01/PHPU.PRES-XXIV/2026, in which the Court considered special circumstances when assessing the filing deadline but declared the petition inadmissible due to the Petitioners’ lack of legal standing. This study aims to analyze the Court’s reasoning and reconstruct the parameters governing these two procedural requirements. The study employs a normative legal method. The analysis finds that the different assessments of the filing deadline and legal standing do not necessarily constitute a contradiction, but require coherent reasoning regarding the basis and limits of special circumstances. The novelty lies in a staged reconstruction model linking jurisdiction, legal standing, filing deadlines, and legal consequences. The model establishes that special circumstances do not automatically override other procedural requirements.