The Certainty Paradox in Constitutional Court Rulings: Reconstructing IKN's Legal Framework for National Strategic Sustainability

Abstract

The construction of Indonesia's new capital, Nusantara (IKN), is a flagship national project whose success depends on regulatory stability. This stability has been complicated by the Constitutional Court's judicial review ruling on the IKN Law, creating a "certainty paradox": while the ruling upholds constitutional supremacy, it simultaneously generates uncertainty for investors and development implementers. This research examines the ruling's legal implications for IKN's regulatory stability and proposes an ideal framework for reconstructing its legal architecture to ensure long-term resilience. Using a normative-juridical method with statutory, case-based, and conceptual approaches, the study finds that the ruling has produced regulatory instability, heightened investment risk, and left the IKN Authority's powers ambiguous stemming largely from derivative regulations' failure to swiftly and coherently incorporate the Court's legal reasoning. In response, the study proposes a three-pillar reconstruction model: (1) a sector-specific Omnibus Regulation to curb regulatory inflation; (2) legal protection through Smart Contracts and investment guarantees; and (3) institutionalized public participation within the Authority's governance structure. This reconstruction is essential to shift IKN's legal framework from reactive-administrative to responsive-strategic, securing its long-term sustainability against future political or judicial shifts.