The Constitutional Court (The Court) held the trial for the case submitted by eleven political parties participating in 2009 election which sought to review the implementation of minimum margin system to get a seat in the Parliament, Wednesday (21/1), at The Court s Plenary Room.

The eleven parties were, Democratic Renewal Party (PDP), Patriot Party (PP), Region Union Party (PPD), National People Care Party (PPRN), Welfare Indonesia Party (PIS), People Bull National Party (PNBK Indonesia), New Indonesia Struggling Party (PPIB), Struggle and Work Party (Pakar Pangan), People Conscience Party  (Hanura), Indonesian Democratic Love Party (PKDI), and Independence Party which were announced as the Petitioners when the Initial Verification trial was held.

Besides the parties, also becoming the Petitioners in the case No. 3/PUU-VII/2009 were the candidate for legislative members 2009 and members of political parties participating in 2009 election. They asked to review existence of Article 202 paragraph (1) of Act No. 10/2008 about General Election for Members of House of Representatives, City Council, and Regional House of Representatives (Act on Election) which was considered to be against Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 2 paragraph (1), Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28D paragraph (1) and paragraph (3), Article 28I paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution.

Article 202 paragraph (1) mentioned: “Political Parties Participating in Election must meet the margin for votes received at the minimum of 2.5% (two point five percent) from the total legal votes nationally to be involved in setting the seats in the House of Representatives.”

According to the Petitioners, such system was applied in countries using parliamentary system, not the ones using presidential system. The Petitioners considered the article reviewed was manipulative because it did not provide an opportunity for independent candidate for legislative members as applied in countries using parliamentary system. “Besides that, the Article (202 paragraph (1)) did not implement a minority system that allows someone with the most votes in certain area to be a member of the parliament automatically; even though the candidate s party did not meet the margin required,” explained the Legal Counsel of the Petitioners, Patra M. Zen.

The Petitioners based their claims on The Court s previous decision No. 22&24/PUU-VI/2008 which stated that the ground for someone s legitimating substance to be a legislative member was the most votes. “From the representation side, this article is considered bad because for the minorities it would be difficult to put their representations (in the Parliament),” added Patra.

Responding to the Petitioners demand to shorten the period of the trials, also meet the agenda of the general election begun on April 9, 2009; The Court had scheduled that the following trial would be on Thursday (29/1), at 11.00 WIB (GMT+07.00). “If you wish to modify (the Petition), if necessary tomorrow it should be done,” advised the Head of Justice Panel Board, Abdul Mukthie Fadjar.

The next trial was a plenary session to hear the information from the government, the Parliament and experts from the Petitioners side. “We expect that on the middle of February we have reached a decision,” ended Mukthie. (Wiwik Budi Wasito)

Photo: Doc. of CCRI PR/Andhini SF

Translated by Yogi Djatnika / CCRI