The Constitutional Court stated that the Petition from Aladin S. Mangga and Andi Muh. Amin Manggabarani, Candidate pair No. 5 in Polewali Mandar Regency Election towards the Announcement of the Polewali Mandar Election Commission No. 22/Kpts.KPU/PM/XI/2008, was rejected. That was announced in the trial for decision readout for case 35/PHPU.D-VI/2008, Thursday (27/11), in the Main Court Room.

Aladin S. Mangga and Andi Muh. Amin Manggabarani (Petitioner) considered the announcement of the Election Commission had been wrong because the Commission had announced them to reach 59,167 votes and put in the second place of the standing, meanwhile Candidate pair H. Muhammad Ali Baal Masdar and H. Nadjamuddin Ibrahim with 79,191 votes were in the first place. According to Aladin-Manggabaran, should the mark-up not have happened with 3,326 votes and the Election Commission had given the invitation cards to 20,162 people, then it would have been sure that they had come out as winner in Polewali Election. To support their argument, Aladin-Manggabaran submitted their written evidences as well as several witnesses.

Responding to the argumentation, the Court said that Aladin-Manggabaran failed to prove the mark-up incident. The Constitutional Court then agreed to the Answer from the Polewali Mandar Election Commission which stated that the vote mark-up as argued by Aladin-Manggabaran was based on mere assumption; in fact, the surplus in the votes assumed were the surplus prepared by the Election Commission as a backup for the people who made a mistake in casting their ballot, also for damaged ballots.

”The use of additional ballots can be justified according to the stipulation in Article 87 of Act No. 32/2004 on Regional Government in conjunction with act No. 12/2008 also in conjunction with Article 75 of Government Decree No. 6/2005 about the Election, Legislation, Inauguration, and Dismissal of Regional Head/Vice,” explained Constitutional Justice M. Alim.

Related to the six witnesses presented, Ichsan Saefudin, Acho Bulu, Indra Wijaya, Muhammad Jufri Ikhlas, Musa, and Abdul Kadir, according to the Constitutional Court, their information could not show the mistake in the process of Polewali Mandar Election Process. ”Besides that, the information from each witness was not related between one another so such information, it does not contain legal value,” said Alim.

Because of that, the Constitutional Court decided that the objection claims from Aladin S. Mangga and Andi Muh. Amin Manggabarani against the Announcement of Polewali Mandar Regency 2008 No. 22/Kpts.KPU/PM/XI/2008 could not be proven according to the law. “The Court consider the Announcement of Polewali Mandar Election Commission No. 22/Kpts.KPU/PM/XI/2008 was legal,” announced the Head of the trial, A. Mukthie Fadjar. (Luthfi Widagdo Eddyono)

Photo: Doc. MK PR/Wiwik BW

Translated by Yogi Djatnika / MK