---

There were three kinds of violations happened in the process of regional elections, administrative violations, criminal violations, and vote recapitulation violations. That was uttered by Prof. H.A.S. Natabaya, a former Constitutional Justice, who sat as Expert from the South Bengkulu Election Commission (Commission) side, who became the Petitionee in the dispute over South Bengkulu Election Result case, Monday (22/12). 
 
Natabaya continued, the problems growing in this case was related to the violation f Article 58 letter f of Act No. 32/2004 about Regional Government (Act on Regional Government) which came under administrative violation domain. As previousl informed, the Petitioner questioned the participation of H. Dirwan Mahmud as a contestant in South Bengkulu Election after being suspected to have been sentenced for seven years in Cipinang Penitentiary, Jakarta. The Petitioner considered the Commission had violated Article 58 letter f of Act on Regional Government) which prohibited a convict of more than five years imprisonment on the basis of court s ruling with fixed legal power to be a candidate in a regional election process.
 
The Legal Counsel of the Related Party (the Elected Candidate on Commission s version), Artaria Dahlan, questioned the possibility to have a lawsuit submitted to the Constitutional Court related to the fact that the Candidate Pair H. Dirwan Mahmud and H. Hartawan (the Winner) had passed the verification before the first round begun, then troubled by another candidate pair after completing the second round process. Responding to that, Natabaya explained, “if it concerns the vote recapitulation result, it may be questioned. If they (Petitioner) objected on the disqualification, then it should be settled in a different chamber (Court).”
 
When a contestant candidate did not meet the requirements, continued Natabaya, it was not the Constitutional Court s authority to examine, instead it became the task of the Election Commission to annul for being ignorant or mistaken in issuing a decision. However, “If the criminal violation caused the vote result to be affected, then it becomes the Court s authority,” explained Natabaya.
 
Besides hearing information from Related Party s Expert, the trial which was adjourned and continued on the following day,  also heard information from Petitionee s and Related Party s witnesses also verifying evidences. Before closing the trial, Head of Constitutional Justice Panel Board, Maria Farida Indrati, requested all parties to submit their conclusion to the latest on Wednesday (24/12) afternoon. The next trial would be held on Friday (9/1/2009), at 14.00 WIB scheduled for Reading out the Court s Decision. (Yogi Djatnika)
 
Photo: Doc. MK PR/Yogi Dj
Translated by Yogi Djatnika / MK

---