Petition of Dispute of Election Result of Intan Jaya District Rejected
Image


The Constitutional Court (MK) decided to reject the entire request Case No. 59/PHPU.D-X/2012 and Fall Case No. 60/PHPU.DX/2012, Intan Jaya district court PHPU, Papua. Similarly, the Court decided in a trial verdict that took place on Wednesday (12/9) afternoon at the Plenary Court Courtroom.

Against Case No. 59/PHPU.DX/2012, before the Court to examine the results of the vote count based on the evidence submitted by the Applicant, the Respondent and the Related Parties, the Court first examine the evidence submitted by the applicant that are especially relevant to the number of votes each candidate. However, the Court found no evidence of recapitulation of vote counting at the district level evidence of the Applicant.

In fact, Petitioner argues that voting right is in accordance with the district recapitulation, Petitioner presented evidence only district-level calculations made by the Applicant Success Team. Additionally Petitioner also filed a proof of certification vote tallies in some polling stations. Form C-1 evidence that Petitioner did not submit complete with attachments, so that the Court could not confirm its authenticity, although the evidence Applicant wet stamped and signed KPPS PPS.

Additionally Petitioner also attach proof villagers agreement regarding the vote of each candidate agreed by each custom home. Court's earlier ruling that Constitutional Court Decision No. 47-81/PHPU.AVII/2009 dated June 2, 2009. Through the evidence of the Petitioner, the Court compared to each other and the Court has found there is a discrepancy in some parts of the evidence that one with the other evidence. Therefore, Petitioner cannot convince the Court in rebuttal to the vote count set by the Respondent.

Against this, the Court said Article 22E Paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution which states that the elections be held by the General Elections Commission (KPU) is a national, permanent and independent. Thus, the constitutionally authorized to hold elections is the KPU. Therefore the General Election by the Election Commission from the planning to the recapitulation of the vote, followed by the determination of the constitutionally elected candidates should be considered correct, as long as the evidence proved otherwise lawful, and convince the judge. Because Petitioner cannot prove nor can convince the Court with the evidence presented, the Court vote counting by the Respondent shall be deemed correct.

Against the arguments of the other, according to the Court, the Petitioner a quo is not evidenced by a fairly convincing evidence that the offense occurred in a structured, systematic and massive, which significantly affect the vote applicant that exceeds Related Parties of the vote. "Therefore, Petitioners' argument is unproven and unwarranted under the law," said the judges.

Meanwhile, in almost the same time, the Constitutional Court decided to declare autumn Case No. 60/PHPU.D-X/2012. Court has summoned the petitioners are legitimate and worth the Clerk of the Court summons to attend the preliminary hearing on August 30, 2012, but the applicant was not present. The absence of the petitioners was not based on lawful grounds.

Furthermore, the Court recalled the petitioners to appear in court 3 September 2012, but the petitioners no longer present without lawful excuse. To the absence of the petitioners in the trial which was not accompanied by lawful excuse despite being legally summoned, the Court, for the trial of rapid, simple, low cost, and for the sake of legal certainty fair, the petition of the applicant should be disqualified. (Nano Tresna Arfana / mh/Yazid.tr)


Wednesday, September 12, 2012 | 18:25 WIB 84