The Constitutional Court stated that the claims from Reyneilda M. Kaisiepo and Max Richard Funmawi Krey, Candidate No. 3 in Biak Numfor Regency Election, were rejected entirely. That was announced in the trial open to public for case 37/PHPU.D-VI/2008, Wednesday (26/11), at the Court s Main Court Room.

Reyneilda M. Kaisiepo and Max Richard Funmawi Krey disagreed to the recapitulation result announced by Biak Numfor Election Commission on 5th November 2008. The Election Commission announced that they got 14,623 votes, whereas their counterpart in the trial, candidate No. 2, Yusuf Melianus Maryen, S.Sos., M.M. and Drs. Alimuddin Sabe attained 18,031 votes.

Supposedly, argued Reyneilda-Krey, the votes for candidate No. 2, Yusuf Melianus Maryen and Alimuddin, had to be reduced by 12,280 votes, that made the total number was only 5,751 votes, meanwhile the votes for the Petitioner remained 14,623 votes; thus, the winner in Biak Numfor Election was supposedly the Petitioner instead of the Related Party (candidate No. 2). Reyneilda-Krey also claimed that there had been violations in the election process.

According to the Constitutional Court, in the evidences submitted by the Petitioner, there was no legality, in form of signature and stamps of issuing institution; and the evidences were issued on March 2008, whereas the voters data from the Petitionee was issued on September 2008, consequently it could not be considered as legal evidence.

“Moreover, assuming that the content of evidence P-5 was correct, the margin of number of votes 12,599 people did not automatically be reduced only from the result for candidate 2, instead according based on logical thinking and justice, the reduce should be applied to all candidates and that could only be done in Biak City District and Samofa District, not in all area of Biak Numfor Regency,” explained Constitutional Justice A. Mukthie Fadjar. In other words, the Petitioner s argument, according to the Court, was unreasonable.

Related to the Petitioner s argument on the violation happened in the election process, the Court considered the evidences submitted were not enough to support the argument and to convince the Justices. “Moreover, assuming that there were indeed violations mentioned, that did not affect the recapitulation result significantly,” continued Mukthie Fadjar.

Therefore, according to the Constitutional Court, all arguments and evidences submitted by the Petitioner did not have solid ground. “The arguments on Petitioner s objection towards the recapitulation result in Biak Numfor Regency Election announced by the Petitionee can not be proved,” concluded the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD. (Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono)

Foto: Dok. Humas MK/Wiwik BW

Translated by Yogi Djatnika