The Constitutional Court conducted a judicial review of Law No. 12 of 2003 concerning General Elections of Members of the People’s Legislative Assembly, Regional People’s Legislative Assembly and Regional Representatives Council (General Election Law) against the 1945 Constitution, on Wednesday (25/07). The hearing was scheduled for the Examination of Revised Petition.

The petition of the case No. 16/PUU-V/2007 was filed by 13 political parties, including Partai Persatuan Daerah (PPD), Partai Perhimpunan Indonesia Baru (PPIB), Partai Bintang Reformasi (PBR), Partai Damai Sejahtera (PDS), Partai Bulan Bintang (PBB), Partai Keadilan dan Persatuan Indonesia (PKPI), Partai Persatuan Demokrasi Kebangsaan (PPDK), Partai Nasional Banteng Kemerdekaan (PNBK), Partai Pelopor (PP), Partai Penegak Demokrasi Indonesia (PPDI), Partai Buruh Sosial Demokrat (PBSD), Partai Serikat Indonesia (PSI), and Partai Karya Peduli Bangsa (PKPB).

The petitioners believe that their constitutional rights have been impaired by the application of the provisions on electoral threshold set forth in Article 9 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the General Election Law. They would not be allowed to contest in the upcoming 2009 general elections, because in the 2004 general elections those political parties gained votes of less than 3% of the total seats in the parliament. The petitioners also explained in their petition that they established their political parties with the main objective of participating in general elections continuously.

In the legal standing section of their revised petition, the petitioners explained that as political parties, they can be categorized as public legal entities which have articles of association setting forth the purpose of their establishment. They have also carried out activities as intended in their articles of association. According to the petitioners, the provisions on electoral treshold set forth in Article 9 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the General Election Law may potentially impair their constitutional rights as political parties. The first reason is that the petitioners cannot participate in the 2009 general elections, despite their existence as political parties. The second reason is that the petitioners will lost their time and money for establishing their political parties. The third one is that the petitioners will also be obligated to conduct re-verification process if they change their names in order to become new political parties so as to be eligible to participate in general elections in the future.

For that reasons, the petitioners in the petitum section requested the Panel of Constitutional Justices to declare the provisions of Article 9 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the General Election Law are contradictory to Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28A, Article 28C, Article 28D, Article 28G, and Article 28I of the 1945 Constitution, and to declare that Article 9 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the General lection Law does not have binding legal force.

Members of the Panel of Constitutional Justices, namely Prof. Abdul Mukthie Fadjar, S.H., M.S., H. Achmad Roestandi, S.H., and Soedarsono, S.H. did not give much comment or correction to the revised petition. During the hearing, the Chairperson of the Panel, Prof. Mukthie, approved several evidence. (Wiwik Budi Wasito)