The public discourse surrounding the potential impeachment of Vice President Gibran Rakabuming Raka has gained traction following a statement from the Indonesian Military Retirees Forum.
The forum criticized the legitimacy of Gibran’s 2024 vice-presidential candidacy, describing it as the result of a forced political consensus and contrary to democratic principles and electoral fairness.
This has prompted renewed debate among the public and legal experts on the constitutional grounds and legal mechanisms for removing a sitting Vice President.
Dr. Yance Arizona, a constitutional law expert from the Faculty of Law at Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM), stated that the forum’s call for the People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) to dismiss the Vice President lacks a sufficient legal basis.
He explained that under Indonesia’s constitutional framework, impeachment must adhere to strict legal procedures and cannot be initiated based solely on public opinion or political pressure.
“The arguments presented are not legally strong. This appears more like a political move aimed at attracting public attention to Vice President Gibran than a genuine legal effort,” said Dr. Arizona.
According to Article 7A of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, a President or Vice President may be impeached only if found to have committed violations such as treason, corruption, bribery, other serious crimes, disgraceful conduct, or if they no longer meet the qualifications for office.
This provision underscores that impeachment cannot be arbitrary; it must be supported by clear evidence and grounded in constitutional law.
“If we refer to the clauses in Article 7A, there is currently no valid legal basis for Gibran’s removal,” he emphasized.
Dr. Arizona further explained that the MPR is not the initiating body in impeachment proceedings.
The process must be initiated by the House of Representatives (DPR), either through a special inquiry or by exercising its right to express an opinion when there is suspicion of a constitutional violation by the President or Vice President.
This process involves multiple state institutions and requires strict compliance with constitutional procedures.
“Only if the Constitutional Court confirms the allegations can the MPR convene a session to dismiss the President or Vice President formally,” he clarified.
In the case of Vice President Gibran, the public debate continues regarding whether alleged ethical violations or irregularities during his candidacy could be considered serious misconduct or disgraceful behavior, as outlined in Article 7A.
Dr. Arizona acknowledged that, in theory, these matters could relate to impeachment, especially if it is legally proven that there was abuse of power during the nomination process.
A legal investigation would be necessary to determine whether such actions meet the threshold for disgraceful conduct or constitutional disqualification.
“If it is proven that Gibran or his father, former President Joko Widodo, was involved in influencing the Constitutional Court or General Elections Commission, it could strengthen claims that Gibran failed to meet the requirements for Vice President,” said Dr. Arizona.
He also highlighted the constitutional requirement that candidates for President and Vice President must be at least 40 years old.
Since Gibran was inaugurated before reaching this age, it could invite broader constitutional interpretation, especially if it is proven that the requirement was intentionally circumvented.
Dr. Arizona concluded that any impeachment discourse must be based on rigorous constitutional reasoning.
He noted that the proper legal route should begin in the DPR, either through the formation of an inquiry committee or by filing a lawsuit with the State Administrative Court (PTUN) to challenge the legitimacy of Gibran’s candidacy.
“These legal avenues could serve as a starting point for substantiating claims of manipulation or constitutional violations. Amid growing public scrutiny, it’s essential that impeachment efforts be grounded in legal substance, not mere political dissatisfaction,” he said.
“If proven, such violations could indeed provide constitutional grounds for impeachment. But it must be pursued through lawful channels—not political pressure,” Dr. Arizona concluded.
Author: Triya Andriyani
Post-editor: Afifudin Baliya
Photographer: Donnie