Constitutionally, Gibran Resigns Honorably

Once the vacancy occurs, President Prabowo Subianto will propose two names, and the MPR will select. This process is constitutional, clearly time-bound, and does not alter the fact that no criminal verdict has yet been rendered.

What remains is the responsibility of other parties—the issuer of the certification and the agency accepting the nomination documents—which can be examined ethically or administratively without mingling it with Gibran's status as an individual.

In conclusion, I want to reaffirm that legally and constitutionally, Gibran's resignation statement is a splendid constitutional action.

His resignation does not mean he is legally guilty. And to this day, he has not been declared guilty of anything in any court.

Even though the certification is annulled, it pertains to an administrative product, not a verdict on a person. Mistakes in procedure by the Ministry of Education and Culture are what led to this situation.

Resigning honorably is the choice that most aligns with the 1945 Constitution. In a state governed by law, clarity in assessing the situation is more valuable than a forced insistence on retaining power.

Constitutionally, Gibran resigns honorably, not because he is guilty, but chooses for the interests of the nation and state, and for the stability of President Prabowo Subianto's government.