Proportionality and The Limits of Rights Claims: A Constitutional Analysis of The LGBT Discourse in Indonesia

Abstract

Human rights claims are frequently invoked as an absolute justification for the legal recognition of same-sex relationships in Indonesia, despite the constitutional limitation clause contained in Article 28J(2) of the 1945 Constitution, which recognizes public morality, religious values, public order, and Pancasila as legitimate grounds for restricting rights. This study aims to examine the constitutional validity of LGBT-related rights claims through a structured proportionality framework and to formulate a more disciplined methodology for constitutional adjudication. The research employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, case, and comparative approaches. Secondary legal materials were analyzed through a qualitative doctrinal method based on the four-stage proportionality test consisting of legitimate aim, suitability, necessity, and proportionality stricto sensu. The findings demonstrate that the constitutional rights commonly invoked in LGBT-related claims are not classified as non-derogable rights under Article 28I(1) and therefore remain subject to limitation under Article 28J(2). The proportionality analysis further indicates that public morality, public order, and Pancasila constitute constitutionally legitimate objectives, although every restriction must still satisfy the sequential stages of proportionality review. The study concludes that adopting a structured proportionality test provides a more transparent, consistent, and constitutionally accountable framework for balancing individual rights and collective constitutional interests in future constitutional adjudication in Indonesia.