Article Sidebar

Download
PDF
Statistic
Read Counter : 126 Download : 77

Main Article Content

Abstract

Presidential succession law is a crucial constitutional instrument designed to ensure the continuity of government in the event of an unexpected vacancy in executive leadership (concurrent vacancy of the President and Vice President). Although such events are rare, their impact on political stability can be profound if not adequately anticipated within a constitutional framework. This article examines how South Korea and the Philippines have constructed their presidential succession laws. South Korea has experienced repeated executive vacancies, while the Philippines, despite sharing substantial similarities in governmental structure with Indonesia—both drawing significant inspiration from the United States Constitution—adopts a notably different succession framework. Using a doctrinal research method with a statutory and comparative constitutional approach, this study finds that both countries have established clear and multi-layered succession structures capable of preventing systemic disruptions even in crises such as presidential impeachments. By contrast, Indonesia’s succession design under Article 8(3) of the 1945 Constitution (UUD NRI 1945) reveals fundamental weaknesses, particularly in assigning collective authority to three ministers without a clear substitution mechanism, thereby exposing the state to the risk of a power vacuum. Nevertheless, the mechanism for electing a new President and Vice President through the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) provides a pragmatic solution tailored to Indonesia’s complex geographical and political conditions. Based on these findings, the article advocates for a comprehensive reform of Indonesia’s executive succession framework through a concrete, operational, and adaptive institutional architecture to ensure that the machinery of government continues to function even under the most severe crises.

Keywords

Power Vacuum Presidential Succession Law Political Stability Presidential System

Article Details

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Author Biography

Febriansyah Ramadhan, Universitas Pendidikan Nasional, Indonesia

Faculty of Law

How to Cite
Ramadhan, F. (2025). PRESIDENTIAL SUCCESSION LAW IN CONSTITUTIONS OF ASIAN STATES: HUKUM SUKSESI KEPRESIDENAN DALAM KONSTITUSI NEGARA-NEGARA ASIA . Constitutional Law Society, 4(2), 255–290. https://doi.org/10.36448/jcls.v4i2.106
Download Citation
Endnote/Zotero/Mendeley (RIS)
BibTeX

References

  1. Agamben, Giorgio. State of Exception Translated by Kevin Attell. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2004.
  2. Agoncillo, Teodoro Andal. The Revolution Second Phase: History of the Filipino People. University of the Philippines, 1990.
  3. Albert, Richard. “The Constitutional Politics of Presidential Succession.” Hofstra Law Review 29, no. 3 (2011): 498–576.
  4. Arsil, Fitra. Teori Sistem Pemerintahan: Pergeseran Konsep dan Saling Kontribusi Antar Sistem Pemerintahan di Berbagai Negara. Depok: Rajagrafindo Persada, 2017.
  5. Asaba, Yuki. “Presidentialism in Korea: A Strong President and a Weak Government.” In Presidents, Assemblies and Policy-making in Asia, 40–58. London: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2013. https://doi.org/10.1057/9781137315083_3.
  6. Asshiddiqie, Jimly. Pengantar Ilmu Hukum Tata Negara. Jaka: Rajwali Pers, 2015.
  7. Bertrand, Jacques. Nationalism and Ethnic Conflict in Indonesia. Cambridge University Press, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511559341.
  8. Budi, Iwan Setia, dan Adi Prabowo Supriyono. “Separation And Distribution Of Power In The Concept Of A Democratic State In Indonesia.” Constitutional Law Society 3, no. 1 (31 Maret 2024): 25–35. https://doi.org/10.36448/cls.v3i1.64.
  9. Celoza, Albert F. Ferdinand Marcos and the Philippines: the political economy of authoritarianism. Boston: Greenwood Publishing, 1997.
  10. Chi Young Pak. “The Third Republic Constitution of Korea: an Analysis.” Western Political Quarterly 21, no. 1 (1968). https://doi.org/10.1177/106591296802100109.
  11. Chopra, Surabhi. “The Constitution of the Philippines and transformative constitutionalism.” Global Constitutionalism 10, no. 2 (Juli 2021): 307–30. https://doi.org/10.1017/S2045381721000174.
  12. Crompton, Crompton, Samuel Willard, Rahmat Herutomo, dan Y. Istiyono Wahyu. 100 Pertempuran Yang Berpengaruh Di Dalam Sejarah Dunia (100 Battles That Shapped World History). Pondok Cabe, Ciputat: Karisma Publishing Group, 2007.
  13. Cumings, Bruce. The Origins of the Korean War: Liberation and the Emergence of Separate Regimes, 1945-1947. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1981.
  14. Da-sol, Kim. “Revisiting Roh Moo-hyun impeachment.” koreaherald, 2016.
  15. Damaitu, Emanuel Raja. “PLURALISM AND SOCIAL JUSTICE IN PANCASILA DEMOCRACY: BETWEEN IDEALS AND REALITY.” Constitutional Law Society 4, no. 01 (27 Maret 2025): 1–17. https://doi.org/10.36448/cls.v4i01.103.
  16. Diamond, Larry, dan Doh Chull Shin. Institutional Reform and Democratic Consolidation in Korea. Stanford: Hoover Institution Press, n.d.
  17. Duverger, Maurice. “a new political system model: semi‐presidential government.” European Journal of Political Research 8, no. 2 (1980). https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1475-6765.1980.tb00569.x.
  18. Eaton, Kent. “Restoration or Transformation? Trapos versus NGOs in the Democratization of the Philippines.” The Journal of Asian Studies 62, no. 2 (Mei 2003): 469–96. https://doi.org/10.2307/3096246.
  19. Elgie, Robert, dan Sophia Moestrup. Semi-presidentialism outside Europe: A comparative study. Semi-Presidentialism Outside Europe: A Comparative Study, 2007. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203954294.
  20. European Parliamentary Research. “The political system of the Republic of Korea. BRIEFING Continental democracies,” 2022.
  21. Fukuyama, Francis, Björn Dressel, dan Boo Seung Chang. “Facing the perils of presidentialism?” Journal of Democracy 16, no. 2 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2005.0026.
  22. Furr, Nathan, dan Susannah Harmon. The Upside of Uncertainty: A Guide to Finding Possibility in the Unknown. Cambridge: Harvard Business Review Press, 2022.
  23. Gandhi, Grace. “Parlemen Korea Selatan Tetapkan Pemakzulan Presiden Park Besok.” Tempo, 2016.
  24. Groves, Bryan N. “Fighting the last war: Is presidential hindsight 20-20?” Presidential Studies Quarterly 53, no. 1 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12821.
  25. Hahm, Chaihark. The Constitution of South Korea: A Contextual Analysis. Berlin: Bloomsbury Publishing, 2023.
  26. Hamdi Muluk. “Demokrasi Presidensial: Sebuah Assesmen Awal.” Jurnal Prisma 35, no. 3 (2016).
  27. Hedman, Eva-Lotta, dan John Sidel, ed. Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century. Routledge, 2005. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203992012.
  28. Hedman, Eva Lotta E., dan John T. Sidel. Philippine politics and society in the twentieth century: Colonial legacies, post-colonial trajectories. Philippine Politics and Society in the Twentieth Century: Colonial Legacies, Post-Colonial Trajectories, 2005. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203992012.
  29. Howell, William G., dan Terry M. Moe. “The strongman presidency and the two logics of presidential power.” Presidential Studies Quarterly 53, no. 2 (2023): 145–68. https://doi.org/10.1111/psq.12830.
  30. Im, Hyug Baeg. “The US role in Korean democracy and security since cold war era.” International Relations of the Asia-Pacific 6, no. 2 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1093/irap/lci134.
  31. Kim, Hakjoon. “The Influence of the American Constitution on South Korean Constitutional Development Since 1948.” Asian Perspective 16, no. 2 (1992): 25–42.
  32. Linder, Wolf, dan Sean Mueller. “Consensus Democracy: The Swiss System of Power-Sharing.” In Swiss Democracy, 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-63266-3_5.
  33. Linz, Juan J. “The Perils of Presidentialism. Journal of Democracy.” Jurnal of Democracy 1, no. 1 (1990): 51–69.
  34. Loewenstein, Karl. Political Power and the Governmental Process. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1957.
  35. Logemann, J. H. A. Over de theorie van een stellig staatsrecht (tentang teori suatu hukum tata Negara positif), terjemahan oleh Makkatutu & JC Pangkerejo. Bandung: Penerbit Ichtiar Baru Van Hoeve, 1975.
  36. Loo, Bastiaan van de. “The failure of the Philippine presidential system.” Asia Europe Journal 2, no. 2 (Juli 2004). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10308-004-0093-9.
  37. McCall, Fiona. “‘Breaching the laws of God and man’: secular prosecutions of religious offences in the interregnum parish.” In Church and People in Interregnum Britain. London: University of London Press, 2021.
  38. Mobius, J Mark. “The Japan-Korea Normalization Process and Korean Anti-Americanism.” Asian Survey 6, no. 4 (Maret 1966): 241–48. https://doi.org/10.2307/2642122.
  39. Moon, Chung In. “South Korea in 2008: From crisis to crisis.” Asian Survey 49, no. 1 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1525/as.2009.49.1.120.
  40. News, BBC. “Park Geun-hye: South Korea lawmakers vote to impeach leader".” Bbc.Com, 2016.
  41. Onishi, Yuki. “Tsuyoi daitouryou toiu kankoku seiji-no gensou: kokumusouri ninmei-to daitouryou hisyositsu [The Myth of ‘Strong President’ in Korean Politics: Appointment of the Prime Minister and the Presidential Office].” In Seiji-teki eguzekutxibu-no hikaku kenkyuu [Comparative Studies on Political Executives], diedit oleh M. Ito, 131–153. Tokyo: Waseda University Press, 2008.
  42. Paez-Hidalgo, MV. “Socio-Demographic Profile of the Members of the 1986 Constitutional Commission.” Philippine Journal of Public Administration 31, no. 1 (1987).
  43. “Public Official Election Act,” n.d.
  44. Puspita Sari A.P, Aulia Oktarizka Vivi, Indah Satria, dan Angga Alfian. “THE PRESIDENT’S TERM OF OFFICE IS THREE PERIOD IN THE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE GOVERNMENT SYSTEM IN INDONESIA.” Constitutional Law Society 2, no. 2 (30 September 2023): 167–77. https://doi.org/10.36448/cls.v2i2.56.
  45. Putzel, James. “Survival of an imperfect democracy in the Philippines.” Democratization 6, no. 1 (1999). https://doi.org/10.1080/13510349908403603.
  46. Ramadhan, Febriansyah. “Pemakzulan Yoon Suk Yeol, Korea Selatan: Mengenal Hukum Suksesi Kepresidenan.” HukumOnline.com, 2025. https://www.hukumonline.com/berita/a/pemakzulan-yoon-suk-yeol--korea-selatan--mengenal-hukum-suksesi-kepresidenan-lt67f6aa61e5313/.
  47. Ramadhan, Febriansyah, I Gede Agus Kurniawan, I Gede Druvananda Abhiseka, Putu Wahyu Widiartana, dan Roqiyul Maarif Syam. “Towards a structural constitution: contribution of Presidential Succession Law to the Constitution of Indonesia.” Legality : Jurnal Ilmiah Hukum 33, no. 2 (30 Juli 2025): 361–95. https://doi.org/10.22219/ljih.v33i2.40203.
  48. Ranawidjaja, Usep. Hukum Tata Negara Indonesia Dasar-Dasarnya. Jakarta: Ghalia Indonesia, 1983.
  49. Relacion, April Farell M., dan Grace C. Magalzo. “System of Checks and Balances in the Philippine Presidential Form of Government.” Journal of Multidisciplinary Studies 3, no. 2 (2014). https://doi.org/10.7828/jmds.v4i1.632.
  50. “Republika Ng Pilipinas,” n.d.
  51. Roosevelt, Franklin D. “Proclamation 2148 – Establishment of the Commonwealth of the Philippines.” The American Presidency Project, 1935.
  52. Rose-Ackerman, Susan, Diane A Disierto, dan Natalia Volosin. “Leveraging Presidential Po: Separation of Powers without Checks and Balances in Argentina and the Philippines.” Berkeley Journal of International Law 29, no. 1 (2011).
  53. Santos, Antonio. Power Politics in the Philippines: The Fall of Marcos. Quezon City: Center for Social Research, 1987.
  54. Scheurkogel, Igor. “Reform of theSouth KoreaSingle-TermPresidential System,” 2016.
  55. Shin, Gi Wook. “South Korea’s democratic decay.” Journal of Democracy, 2020. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2020.0048.
  56. Shin, Gi Wook, dan Rennie J. Moon. “South Korea after impeachment.” Journal of Democracy 28, no. 4 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2017.0072.
  57. Shugart, Matthew Søberg. “Semi-Presidential Systems: Dual Executive And Mixed Authority Patterns.” French Politics 3, no. 3 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1057/palgrave.fp.8200087.
  58. Silliman, G. Sidney, dan Lela Garner Noble. “11 Citizen Movements and Philippine Democracy.” In Organizing for Democracy, 280–310. University of Hawaii Press, 1998. https://doi.org/10.1515/9780824844592-014.
  59. “Statutes of the Republic of Korea,” n.d.
  60. Stenson, Kristopher. “Caesar, Pompey, and the CoLLapse of the First Triumvirate,” 2010. https://research.libraries.wsu.edu/.
  61. Strnad, Grażyna. “The Sixth Republic under Roh Tae Woo: The Genesis of South Korean Democracy.” Polish Political Science Yearbook 39, no. 1 (Maret 2010): 204–25. https://doi.org/10.15804/ppsy2010011.
  62. “The 1899 Malolos Constitution,” n.d.
  63. Thompson, Mark R. “The Philippine presidency in Southeast Asian perspective: imperiled and imperious presidents but not perilous presidentialism.” Contemporary Politics 24, no. 3 (Mei 2018): 325–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/13569775.2017.1413503.
  64. Wurfel, David. Filipino Politics. Development and Decay. Ithaca: Cornell University Press, 1988.
  65. Yu, Honp’ob Chin-O. A Commentary Constitution. Seoul: Myong Se Tang, 1952.
  66. Yun, Seongyi. “Democratization in South Korea: Social Movements and Their Political Opportunity Structures.” Asian Perspective 21, no. 3 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1353/apr.1997.a921122.
  67. Zagoria, Donald S., Raymond Bonner, dan Carl H. Landé. “Waltzing with a Dictator: The Marcoses and the Making of American Policy.” Foreign Affairs 66, no. 1 (1987): 205. https://doi.org/10.2307/20043354.