Elections are part of the implementation of democratic principles whereby the people can elect a state leader or his representatives who make a policy based on the will of the people outlined by the head of state or the people's representatives. The nature of elections is a means of democracy that primarily serves a state government by, from, and for the people. In other words, it embodies the sovereignty in the hands of the people within the framework of a democratic constitutional state. Democracy in Indonesia is a constitutional norm. For democracy to be able to rotate by the axis of the constitution, then democracy must be maintained. The problem that will be the focus of attention of this paper is the axiom of the presidential threshold system after the Constitutional Court's decision to bring the system of government in Indonesia. The political legality of the presidential threshold system is not inconsistent with the constitution in Indonesia. The purpose of this paper is to know the direction of the legislative and presidential election system in 2009 and 2014 in the decision of the Constitutional Court and the political implications of the Constitutional Court decision on the legislative and presidential election system in 2009 and 2014. This research method will examine the subject matter through a case approach. It examines the ratios in the decisions of the Constitutional Court which are the object of research and the approach of legislation. The abolition of presidential threshold provides significant benefits in Indonesia's democratic system. This policy can be a restoration of constitutional rights that were previously hurt by the remedy of constitutional rights. Many advantages will be obtained especially from small parties to carry the presidential candidate. Also, the president's choice is also more diverse. Presidential threshold will make it easier for the president to carry out government duties, due to the absence of other dominant party interventions in parliament.