Petitioner Eri Purnomohadi (center) giving information on the judicial review of Act on Election accompanied by the legal counsels, Refly Harun (left) and Maheswara Prabandono (right), Thursday (12/11), at The Court Panel Room. (Doc. CCRI/Annisa Lestari)
Jakarta-MKOnline, The Election eventually still left unsettled conflicts. At least that was the picture from case Number 132/PUU-VII/2009 pleaded by Ir. H. Eri Purnomohadi, M.M., to The Constitutional Court (The Court), Thursday (12/11). This second Panel session to examine Petitioner’s improved Petition was chaired by Constitutional Justice Arsyad Sanusi accompanied by Abdul Mukthie Fadjar and Akil Mochtar as Member Justices.
The Petitioners’ Legal Counsel, Refly Harun, delivered their improved petition that questioned Article 50 paragraph (1) letter k of Act Number 10 of 2008 about Election for members of the House of Representatives (DPR), City Council (DPD), and Regional House of Representatives (DPRD) commonly known as Act on Election.
Article 50 paragraph (1) letter k of Act on Election mentioned that "candidate members of the DPR, Provincial DPRD, and City/ Regency DPRD have to fulfill the requirements: …letter (k). resign from his/her position as civil servant, member of The Indonesian Armed Forces, member of The Indonesian Police, manager in a State and/or Regional Enterprises, also other position whose budget are from State Funding, which is supported by a resignation letter that can not be withdrawn."
Refly explained accurately that the mentioned article had caused constitutional damages to the Petitioner. "The article does not clearly mention other institutions whose budgets are from state funding," said Refly. Refly also stated that there was evidence in form of a letter from the Head of West Java Regional Election Commission stating that the Petitioner had met the legal requirements to be a legislative candidate member in West Java XI voting area.
West Java Election Commission originally announced Eri Purnomohadi as a candidate with the most votes. Yet, based on the report from the Election Monitoring Body, Eri was still listed as a member of a committee in downstream oil and gas regulator (BPH Migas) whose budget were related to the State Budgeting. Later on the Election Commission replaced Eri with a candidate from National Mandate Party (PAN) with second most votes.
In this case, the Petitioner demanded a retroactive decision. The logic in law that was brought forth by Refly was the decision of The Court itself which put an end to the retroactivity of a decision. The decisions, among others, were Number 012-016-019/PUU-IV/2006, Number 4/PUU-VII/2009, Number 102/PUU-VII/2009, and Number 110-111-112-113/PUU-VII/2009 which imposed a retroactive principle within the decisions.
Eri Purnomohadi, the Principal Petitioner, added that his family and constituents wondered why he had not been inaugurated. "My constituents are asking why I have not been inaugurated despite the most votes I gained," blasted Eri.
Arsyad Sanusi and Akil Mochtar asked why the Justices’ advices regarding the retroactive principle had not been used as the ground for the Petitioner’s improved file. "Does the Petitioner wish to keep the Petition as it is, thus it remains to be retroactive?" Arsyad Sanusi clarified.
Refly Harun then stated that for the Petitioner’s sake, the Petitioner convinced that the Justice’s decision should be retroactive. After hearing the Petitioner’s argument, Panel Board of Justice decided that the session would be continued in the Plenary level after they brought the case in front of the Justice Deliberation Meeting. (Feri Amsari/YDJ tr.)
Thursday, November 12, 2009 | 13:29 WIB 250