Constitutional Court Decision 264/PUU-XXIV/2026 is a 2026 ruling of the Constitutional Court of Indonesia on a petition for material review of the special hajj quota (kuota haji khusus) in Undang-Undang 8/2019 on the administration of the hajj and umrah, as last amended by Undang-Undang 14/2025.^[1] The petition, brought by an individual citizen registered in the queue for the regular hajj, challenged the rule setting the special quota at 8 per cent of Indonesia's hajj quota as discrimination based on ability to pay.^[2] It is one of the constitutional review cases decided by the Court on 12 August 2026.^[3]

The Court held that it had jurisdiction but did not reach the merits. It found that the petition did not explain how the challenged provisions conflicted with the constitutional provisions it invoked, and that its grounds and relief did not correspond, and declared the petition unclear (obscuur) and inadmissible.^[4][3:1]

¶ Background and petition

The hajj law, part of the field of public administration, divides Indonesia's hajj quota between the regular hajj and a special hajj (haji khusus) track. As quoted in the petition, Pasal 64(2) as amended by Undang-Undang 14/2025 reads that the special hajj quota is set at 8 per cent of Indonesia's hajj quota, and its elucidation defines that quota as the actual quota resulting from the decisions of the governments of Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.^[5]

The petition was received on 8 July 2026, registered on 9 July 2026 and revised on 3 August 2026.^[6] Its author argued that the 8 per cent allocation reduced the places available each year to the regular queue, citing the 2025 season in which, on the petitioner's figures, 17,680 of 221,000 places went to the special track. He framed the constitutional question as whether a fixed allocation to a track accessible in practice only to those able to pay higher service fees was an objective and proportionate distinction, or a breach of equal treatment (Pasal 28D(1)), of the freedom from discriminatory treatment (Pasal 28I(2)) and of the state's guarantee of freedom of worship (Pasal 29(2)).^[2:1]

The relief sought a declaration that Pasal 64(2) was unconstitutional and not binding, and that the phrase "special hajj quota" in Pasal 8(3), 64(1), (3) and (4), 65(1) to (4), 66 and 73(6) was likewise unconstitutional.^[7]

¶ Ruling

The Court heard the petition at a preliminary examination on 20 July 2026 and, under Pasal 39 of the Constitutional Court Law and Pasal 36(3) of Peraturan Mahkamah Konstitusi 7/2025, advised the petitioner to clarify the object, structure, standing, grounds and relief, in particular the conflict between the challenged norms and the constitutional provisions. The revision was received and heard on 3 August 2026, the deadline set.^[8]

The Court accepted that the revised petition followed the required structure, but held that formal sufficiency also turns on the clarity of each part and on the correspondence between grounds and relief, citing Pasal 51(3)(b) of the Constitutional Court Law and Pasal 68 of Peraturan MK 7/2025.^[9] It found that the petition did not set out clear and sufficient legal argument on the conflict between Pasal 64(2) and Pasal 28D(1), 28I(2) and 29(2), and contained no argument at all on the conflict of the phrase "special hajj quota" in the other provisions, saying only that the Court had advised the petitioner to align them with Pasal 64(2). It added that the phrase is linked to the wider term "special hajj" used elsewhere in the law. The mismatch between grounds and relief left unclear what the petitioner sought.^[4:1]

The operative order declared the petition inadmissible. The decision was reached by nine justices on 4 August 2026 and pronounced in open plenary session on 12 August 2026, with Suhartoyo presiding.^[3:2] The provisions were not reviewed on their substance. The same session disposed of decision 263/PUU-XXIV/2026 on the Foreign Relations Law on the same ground of vagueness.^[10]

CRPG's regulatory tracker published an account of the decision on 8 September 2026.^[11]

¶ See also

• Constitutional Court Decision 270/PUU-XXIV/2026
• Constitutional Court Decision 260/PUU-XXIV/2026

¶ External links

• Decision (Mahkamah Konstitusi)
• Case record (Mahkamah Konstitusi)
• CRPG: Constitutional Review of Special Hajj Quota Provisions: MK 264/PUU-XXIV/2026 (crpg.id, 8 September 2026)

¶ References