The Constitutional Court (MK) held a session of the General Election Result Dispute over Regional Head and Deputy Head of Regional District Case No. Sarmi. 105, 106, and 107/PHPU.D-IX/2011, at the Court Meeting Room, Wednesday (19/10).On this occasion, the Petitioner Berthus Kyeu-Kyeu and Isak S. In Case No. 106 Wersemetawar it said in his petition that his objection to the recapitulation of vote counting results of Election, dated 30 September 2011. Recapitulation count ballots were conducted by the Respondent has violated the law.

"It was caused by Respondent did not provide a copy of Form C-1 KWK KPU, DA-1 KWK KPU, and BB-1 KWK KPU to the witness of the Applicant at the plenary meeting of the polling station level, district level and district level. Even at the plenary vote recapitulation counting district level does not include the Petitioner Respondent, incasu witnesses at the district level for the plenary session except in the Bongo district, "said Applicant.

On the front panel of Constitutional Justice Akil Mochtar led, accompanied by Zoelva Hamdan and Muhammad Alim, respectively as members, the Petitioner also said that the violations committed by Respondent in setting the terms of political party support to the candidate pair No. 4 sequence using the political parties that had supported the Petitioner and the other candidates.

"So there is support for multiple political parties that resulted in a pair of candidate’s No. 4 passes in order to be potential participants. Then the couple can also win the General Election Sarmi, "explained the Applicant through its legal counsel Heru Widodo.

Similar delivered by Melky Korneles Daufera and Adrian Roy Senis as Case No 105. In the petition, Petitioner said it objected to the Commission’s decision Sarmi as Respondent in setting the recapitulation of the vote in 2011 General Election Sarmi. "Respondent has violated the vote recapitulation procedures as provided for Article 25 paragraph No. 3peraturan Commission. 73 of 2009 on guidelines for the implementation of procedures for the recapitulation of the results of the vote election district Sarmi," said Applicant.

Petitioner George Weyasu and Nicanor Dimo in Case No. 107 say that the deeds and folding ballots conducted by the Respondent in the Election process, obviously very detrimental to the Applicant. Because what is done by the Respondent contrary to the provisions of Commission Regulation 17 of 2010 concerning the Commission change the number 66 of 2009, Article 7 paragraph (4) and (5) is. In this case, Petitioner was placed separately in the left corner of the ballots at the bottom.

 "So, if the ballot paper was opened by the voters at polling stations in the booth, number and name of the applicant is not visible and the visible stars only. Sequence 4 (four) along with the other candidates, "explained the Applicant. On the other hand, the applicant also added that the Respondent as Chairman of the Commission is clearly not independent and honest in performing stages Sarmi district election." Because when the Respondent was the chairman of the Commission, is also a board New Indonesia Party of Struggle that carries No. sequence 4, "he explained.

In the end of the trial, Judge of the Constitutional Assembly will open the hearing back to listen to the answer of the Respondent and the Related Parties. "So we postponed this court, to hear the answer to the Respondent and the Related Parties," said Akil Mochtar, as leader of the trial. (Shohibul Umam / mh/Yazid.tr)