Panel of Judges: Ahmad Sodiki and Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi.

---

Judicial Review of Act No.24/2003 on the Constitutional Court again held the Constitutional Court (MK), Wednesday (7 / 9) afternoon in the courtroom of the Constitutional Court Panel. The agenda is the improvement of the petition regarding judicial review of Article 10 paragraph (1) Law No.24/2003 on "Constitutional Court the authority to hear at the first and last and the decision is final". Petitioner is Afloriano Melesen, Iskandar-Dabi Dabi, Junaidi Dean, M. Djan Mangoda, Saima poured, Arsad Sardan and Demianus Ice.

In the repair of the petition, the Petitioner Parties submit that the Constitutional Court’s decision has impaired No.59/PHPU.D-IX/2011 petition because the decision a quo Petitioner has been deprived of their rights as a Regent and Vice Regent of Elected District Morotai Island.

"Petitioners’ rights as a Regent and Vice Regent Elected clearly a loss suffered by the Petitioner’s constitutional post No.59/PHPU.D-IX/2011 Constitutional Court," said Petitioner.

Court Decisions Related No.59/PHPU.D-IX/2011, according to the Petitioner, has led to public perception that the island of Morotai KPU does not work based on the principles of elections, as mandated in Article 2 of Law No.22/2007, which is guided by the election in principle independent, honest, equitable, rule of law, orderly election, the public interest, transparency, proportionality, professionalism, accountability, efficiency, and effectiveness.

In addition, says Petitioner, the Constitutional Court (MK) has made the evidence of the recapitulation at the polling station level, the KDP and the District as a consideration in the decision a quo, whereas the evidence a quo doubtful.

Petitioner also revealed the emergence of election disputes to be resolved in the trial Court to prove an alleged violation of the principles of the election, either by the organizers of elections at the provincial and / or district / city or by the participant’s own election.

"Examination of Disputes election in the Constitutional Court opened the way for the achievement of settlement of Disputes election through legal channels is expected decision, wise and give legal certainty," said Petitioner.

In addition, the said petition, a three-day deadline for registering an objection petition against the decision of the Commission about Summary of Results from the date of announcement of the Acquisition Sound recapitulation, it is very short.

"So sometimes the parties who filed the dispute in the Court are relatively unprepared to submit documents and witnesses supporting evidentiary dispute," explained the Petitioner.

Moreover, the Petitioner continued, sometimes up allegations of data manipulation or false testimony in a trial to decide the election dispute in the Court a quo. Therefore the decision of the Constitutional Court is final and binding, according to the Petitioner, then when proven through examination of the criminal justice manipulation of evidence and false witnesses, then closed the efforts of the parties already get justice and legal certainty.

"Therefore, the Court should open up the possibility of examination at the level of judicial review against the decision before the Constitutional Court," the petition pleaded to the judges, chaired by Judge Ahmad Fadlil Sumadi Constitution. (Nano Tresna A./Yazid.tr)

---