The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the petition of the election dispute case of Merangin Regency. "The verdict is rejected the petition in its entirety," as read by Chief Justice of the Plenary M. Akil Mochtar, who was accompanied by other constitutional judges, the reading of the verdict on Thursday (25/4) afternoon.

As it was known, Petitioner in Case 28/PHPU.D-XI/2013 is M. Syukur and Fauziah as candidate number 2. The Respondent is Merangin Regency. Related Party is Haris-Khafied as candidate number 4.

Petitioner’s argument against the members of the winning team candidate number 1 which doubles the organizer of the election, the Court considered Petitioner’s evidence does not give confidence to the Court because it is only based on a list of names in the SK team of Nalim-Salam, without evidence of a position as compared to the election organizers, and did not clearly known the correct identity of each name is postulated.

In addition, if the Petitioner’s argument proved, quod non, double post position as well as the organizers of the election campaign team candidate number 1, is detrimental to all the other election candidates attendees. Including adverse candidate number 4, so it is not fair if the Related Party shall bear the legal consequences of violations committed by the other candidates. Based on the above considerations, the Court is Petitioner’s arguments are legally proven.

Related voters list (DPT) Petitioner argues that there are police officers enrolled in the DPT and use their voting rights, namely Hendra Widiyanto and Atinudin Zaluku in TPS 09 Ulak River Village, District Nalo Tantan and M. Sabri at TPS 10 Pematang Kandis Village, District Bangko. To prove the Petitioner filed a proof of P-8 form of identification card in the name of Hendra Widiyanto, and presented witnesses named Hamid who testified that in DPT TPS 09 are the names of two members of the Police, the Atinudin Zaluku and Hendra Widiyanto.

To Petitioner’s argument, the Court held there were indeed at least two members of the Police in the name of DPT TPS 9 Ulak River Village. Hamid witness testified that although the witness knew there were police officers in the name of DPT TPS 9 but the witness did not know whether the police officers to vote or not. While PPK Nalo Tantan members named Abdul Malik explained that police officers name has been dropped from the DPT and they did so. That is why the Court considered Petitioner’s arguments are legally proven.

Furthermore, the Court responded to Petitioners’ argument that the Respondent was not careful and thorough examination of the factual diploma in HA Greetings HD (vice-regent candidate number 1), if indeed the strong suspicion on diploma of one candidate, the Court will consider the assessment carried out by the authorities in assessing the authenticity of legal documents.

If Petitioners’ argument proven, the action of candidate number 1 is in addition to potentially harm Petitioners also harm the Related Parties. So that it was out of place if the Related Party shall bear the losses incurred by the other party. Based on these considerations, the Court argument, the Petitioner has not been proven according to law. (Nano Tresna Arfana / mh)