The Constitutional Court held a trial for dispute over South Bengkulu Election Result, Thursday (18/12), at the Court s Panel Room scheduled for Initial Examination. Case No. 57/PHPU.D-VI/2008 was pleaded by Candidate Pair, H. Reskan Effendi dan Dr. drh. Rohidin Mersyah, MMA. General Election Commission in South Bengkulu sat as the Petitionee.

The Petitioner questioned the Letter of the South Bengkulu Election Commission No. 59/2008 dated December 10, 2008 about the Announcement of Elected Candidate in Second Round South Bengkulu Election 2008 which was won by candidate pair No. 7, H. Dirwan Mahmud, S.H., and H. Hartawan with 39.069 legal votes. Meanwhile, the Petitioner who was Candidate Pair No. 8 came out with 36.566 legal votes.

The Petitioner considered the stages in the election had been done unfairly, dishonestly, and partially, apart from the fact that it also had broken the law such as allowing a convict who spent 7 years imprisonment in Cipinang Penitentiary to be a candidate in the South Bengkulu Election.

Besides that, there were also violations involving the voters, for example, there were voters who were not listed in the Fixed or Temporary Voters Lists and did not get the invitation letter to vote. Other violations related to money politics, “there was an indication of goods or money giveaway with a promise to vote for Candidate No.7 and a number of other violations that affected the result of the recapitulation,” mentioned the Legal Counsel of the Petitioner, Andi M. Asrun.

Based on those things, the Petitioner demanded the Court, First, to state illegal and not binding the Decision of the South Bengkulu Election Commission No. 59 dated December 10, 2008 about the Announcement of Elected Candidate in Second Round South Bengkulu Election 2008. Second, announcing the correct recapitulation result was the Petitioner, H. Reskan Effendi and Dr. drh. Rohidin Mersyah, M.M., with 45.100 legal votes; meanwhile, H. Dirwan Mahmud, S.H. and H. Hartawan got 30.553 votes. That automatically stated the Petitioner s demand for the Court to announce the Petitioner as the elected candidate.

Interestingly, there was a Petition improvement done by the Petitioner s Legal Counsel, Andi M. Asrun at the beginning of this trial. Generally, improvement was prepared after hearing the advices from Justice Board. ”You have submitted your improved Petition, so there will not be anymore improvement?” asked the Head of Justice Panel Board, Maria Farida Indrati, confirming the situation. Asrun said that his party had prepared the improvement and he considered that as enough.

Even though so, a member of the Justice Panel Arsyad Sanusi still made his advice for the Petitioner, ”through Madame Head of the Panel, I advise the Petitioner to evaluate point 2 and 3.” Arsyad also explained that by not making another improvement, apart from the unavailability of the Petitionee s reply, the Petitioner could start preparing all evidences in form of letters and other written documents to be submitted in the next trial which was scheduled on the following day, Friday (19/12) at 14.00 WIB. (Yogi Djatnika)

Photo: Doc. MK PR/Yogi Dj

Translated by Yogi Djatnika / MK