The Constitutional Court finally decides to reject the petition in its entirety PHPU Jepara - Case No. 5/PHPU.D-X/2012. "In the exception, rejects the Respondent and the Related Parties exception. In the main application, reject the petition in its entirety, "it read by the Chairman of the Constitutional Court and Chairman of the Plenary Session Mahfud MD was accompanied by other constitutional judges on the court verdict on Monday (5/3) afternoon.

Court argued that the distribution of stickers and data collection practices of voters conducted by volunteers of the Related Parties may not be the basis that citizens have been persuaded or forced to choose a particular candidate and did not prove that the distribution and pasting the sticker is accompanied by the practice of money politics or intimidation against civilians society.

Court explained again, the applicant can not prove with sufficient evidence to convince voters that the data collection as it may determine or direct the citizen to choose a particular candidate is not valid. In addition, the applicant can not prove by a RI in officers directing the Ministry of Religious Affairs in the district of Jepara to win the Related Parties, so that the Petitioner must be excluded.

Based on the above considerations, the Petitioners’ argument that the violations are systematic, structured, and the massive influence the implementation of Jepara Regency Election Year 2012 performed by the Related Party and government officials are not proven and unwarranted by law.

Further, Petitioner argues there is a difference voting results are determined by the Respondent with the calculation performed by the Applicant through legal documents that set forth the results of the vote and the vote was reduced Petitioner Related Parties increased. Petitioner argues that the determination made by the Respondent, the Petitioner votes to be reduced by 1928 votes and the Related Parties increased by 1999 votes. In order to prove their argument, Petitioners filed a letter of evidence that is evidence of P-24 P-42 to the evidence and witnesses Rachmat Akbar.

To the Petitioners’ argument, the Respondent denied the claim that the Respondent does not change the results of a calculation of the polling station level to district level. Respondent explained that the process of counting and recapitulation of vote counting implemented in stages, and open with the attendance of witnesses to the Petitioner, the other candidates, Muspida, Panwaslu Jepara district and others.

After the Court has examined and carefully examine the Petitioner, Respondent’s objection, evidence of the Petitioner, Respondent’s evidence, the Court argues that Petitioner and Respondent evidences are Form C-1 at each polling station in the district in question by the Applicant, there is no difference in vote count as significant between the Form C-1 to Form DA at the district level.

"The argument concerning the petition difference in total numbers are disputed by the applicant sound is the addition of sound to the Related Parties 1999 and 1928 votes against the Petitioner reduction is not significant and can not influence the final results of Election. Based on these considerations, according to the Petitioners’ argument is unproven and unwarranted under the law, "said Court. (Nano Tresna Arfana / mh/Yazid.tr)