---

The Constitutional Court has affirmed that the organizers of elections must be cleared from the element of political parties. Even if there are former members of political parties, it should be resigned at least five years. Thus, at least the core of the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 81/PUU-IX/2011 regarding judicial review of Law No. 15/2011 about Election Organizer, which was held in the building of the Constitutional Court on Wednesday (01/04/2012) evening.

"Elections should be done freely, honestly and fairly. The principle of honest and fair can only be realized if, among other things, election organizers can not be interfered with or influenced by any other party. Therefore, the organizers of election can not be left to governments or political parties, and cause potentially prone to be influenced or exploited by various interests, so that elections must be held by an electoral commission of a national, permanent, and independent as Article 22E Paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution, "explained the Court in its decision.

"Members of political parties should not be stopped unless the organizers of election five years," said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Moh. Mahfud MD when met on the sidelines of busy at the Court House on Thursday (5 / 1) afternoon.

In essence, according to him, there are two fundamental reasons. First was through the Constitutional Court decision to maintain the independence of election organizers, both in the General Election Commission and the Election Supervisory Board, as intended by the 1945 Constitution. "Secondly, that our laws are consistent politics," he said.

Mahfud added, there is a difference between an independent agency with an independent agency. "Election Commission is an independent institution, not independence. There is a difference between the independence of the independent according to the Act of 1945, "he said.

"If the Election Commission is an independent institution, while the judicial authority such as the Constitutional Court or the Supreme Court is an independent institution," continued Mahfud. That is why the pattern of recruitment (especially related to requirements) at two different institutions.

The second reason was the aim of maintaining the consistency of legal politics, particularly regarding the conduct of elections, backed by the experience of organizing the history of elections in Indonesia. According to Mahfud, we had a bad experience in the administration of elections when handled by a government or political parties.

In the new order, the election is in the hands of the Government. The result, Election Institute (LPU abbreviated, as it is) is more inclined to the ruler. "LPU first under the Government was clearly in favor of certain political forces in the days of the new order," said Mahfud.

The beginning of reform, are handled by political parties. The result was not much better. The proof, the results of these elections failed because the Commission approved at that time did not want to legitimize it. Finally, it had taken over by the President by issuing Presidential Decree No. 77/1999. "Itukan not good," he commented.

Responding to a series of facts, he concluded, "The government and political parties are equally bad (in dealing with elections)."

Finally, continued Mahfud, the thought arises that the Commission is truly independent. Thus was formed the Commission for Elections 2004 and 2009 with, among other things, give priority to the principle of independence. "If the element into another political party, it means our legal politics back again," he added." It was not consistent". Therefore, according to him, with the Constitutional Court’s decision is expected in the future elections can walk better. (Dodi/Yazid.tr)

---