Compromised Relations of Legislation: Directive Principles vs. Democracy in ASEAN Perspective

DOI

10.2991/978-94-6239-785-9_10How to use a DOI?

Keywords

Constitutional Directive; Constitutional Interpretation; Directive Principles of State Policy

Abstract

This study critically examines the constitutional antinomy that has emerged within Indonesia’s governance framework concerning the role and normative authority of state directive principles. These principles, which once provided a cohesive, long-term national trajectory through instruments such as the GBHN (Garis-Garis Besar Haluan Negara), have been constitutionally rendered inert following amendments to the 1945 Constitution. The subsequent shift of developmental authority to the political branches, specifically the executive, has introduced a profound structural tension. The analysis identifies two key jurisprudential disruptions stemming from this institutional recalibration. First, it posits a fundamental re-assignment of interpretive authority over core constitutional values from a constitutionally mandated body to a politically responsive executive, thereby displacing the formal mechanism for ensuring national coherence. Second, by eliminating the possibility of a binding, supra-presidential mandate, this paradigm shift has attenuated the normative force of long-term strategic commitments. This has effectively introduced a form of political constitutionalism into a legalistic framework, raising critical questions regarding institutional legitimacy, democratic accountability, and the very nature of constitutional authority. Employing a normative legal research methodology, this study draws upon constitutional texts and scholarly literature. It develops a theoretical framework to elucidate how this institutional re-engineering has reshaped the legal-political relationship and transformed the processes of constitutional meaning-making. Ultimately, this study contributes to a deeper understanding of the paradox of national governance in a system where democratic dynamism may conflict with strategic coherence, thereby contributing to broader academic discourse on constitutional design in emerging democracies.

Copyright

© 2026 The Author(s)

Open Access

Open Access This chapter is licensed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/), which permits any noncommercial use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license and indicate if changes were made.

Download article (PDF)

TY  - CONF
AU  - Resa Hasan
AU  - Luna Dezeana Ticoalu
PY  - 2026
DA  - 2026/10/07
TI  - Compromised Relations of Legislation: Directive Principles vs. Democracy in ASEAN Perspective
BT  - Proceedings of the UUM 13th International Legal Conference 2025 (UUMILC 2025)
PB  - Atlantis Press
SP  - 133
EP  - 148
SN  - 2667-128X
UR  - https://doi.org/10.2991/978-94-6239-785-9_10
DO  - 10.2991/978-94-6239-785-9_10
ID  - Hasan2026
ER  -