ABSTRACT
This chapter argues that the primary reason for the application of prospective invalidation stems from the Court’s authority to review in abstract the consistency of statutes with the Constitution. It suggests that the Court’s pragmatic approach is also one of the reasons for the adoption of prospective invalidation. The chapter shows that the term non-retroactive invalidation is more suitable to describe the phenomenon in Indonesia, in which the Court has selectively applied the prospective effect of its decisions. It reviews the development of prospective invalidation in the Indonesian Constitutional Court since its inception. The chapter describes prospective invalidation in Indonesia and examines whether it has a strong legal justification and the driving forces behind the adoption of the technique. It examines the role of the Indonesian Constitutional Court in applying prospective invalidation since its inception. The Constitutional Court accepted the claimant’s argument and nullified the ‘lese majeste’ law.
