Constitutional Court (MK) refused to entirely petition filed by candidate Taswin Borman - Kemal Toana in Parigi Moutong Regency General Election on Thursday (29/8) at Plenary Room. The decision No. 102/PHPU.D-XI/2013 read by Chief Justice M. Akil Mochtar, accompanied by seven other constitutional judges.

"Declare the exception, rejected the defendant’s exception and exception related parties. In the main petition rejected applicants for all," said Akil.

Consideration read by Constitutional Court Judge Patrialis Akbar, Petitioner argues the Respondent has removed the constitutional rights of the Advent Christian voters set a timetable for Parigi Moutong election (voting) on Saturday, July 6, 2013 which coincides with the Sabbath is a day of religious worship Adventist Christian. Based on these facts the trial, further Patrialis, it is not proven Respondent intentionally removing voting rights from Advent Christians in a structured, systematic and massive. In addition, there is no indication that the determination of the polling day that coincides with the Advent Christian worship is to eliminate the voting rights of Christians Advent.

“Moreover, even if the whole Christian Adventists give voting rights to Parigi Moutong Regency Election 2013 besides not necessarily the candidate they choose, even if Petitioner chose, they do not significantly affect the sound of the vote each candidate, especially between the Petitioner and the Related Parties . Therefore, according to the Court a quo Petitioners’ argument is not unreasonable under the law," said Patrialis.

Petitioner also argues that the Respondent alignments to Candidate Number 2 by not providing Form C.KWK.KPU to witnesses who have a mandate from the Applicant. To the legal issues, according to the Court, after hearing evidence and facts to notice, given not form C1 - KWK.KPU to witness a mandate from the applicant due to the fault of the witnesses who come home early before the form C1.KWK.KPU is signed by Chairman and KPPS Members. Moreover, according to the Court, are not received by the witness C1.KWK.KPU Form has been mandated by the Petitioner is not a fault of the Respondent that it cannot be borne by the Respondent.

"Moreover, the evidence and facts of the trial was not given to the C1.KWK.KPU Form Applicant witnesses not related to the addition or subtraction vote one candidate in Parigi Moutong Regency Election in 2013. Therefore, according to the Court a quo Petitioners’ argument is not unreasonable under the law," he said.

As for the other Petitioner, Hamdan Zoelva Deputy Chief Justice explained the violation does not include violations structured , systematic and massive that significantly affect the vote applicant to exceed the Related Parties of the vote . "According to the petition the Court unproven and unwarranted under the law," he said . (Lulu Anjarsari / mh)