Towards the upcoming 9th July Presidential Election, all Parties asked Constitutional Court (MK) to re-construe Article 159 verse (1) Act 42/2008 about Presidential Elections (Pilpres) which has been accused to smear multi-interpreted requirement of President-Vice President pair candidacy.
Constitutional Lawyer Forum, United for Election and Democracy (Perludem), alongside with two individual Applicants, Sunggul Harmonang Sirait and Haposan Situmorang plead a Judicial Review over the Article because there are only two pair of candidates compete in the upcoming Pilpres.
Andi Muhammad Asrun, Lawyer Forum’s representative explained that Article 159 verse (1) Act of Pilpres, Article 6A verse 3 1945 Constitution smear legal uncertainty.
Article 6A verse (3) 1945 Constitution says, “A pair of President and Vice President Candidates who gained more than fifty per cent from total amount of votes, with at least twenty per cent of all votes which spared in more than a half of all provinces in Indonesia, are inaugurated to be the President and Vice President.”
Article 6A verse (4) 1945 Constitution says, “In case no presidential candidates are chosen, two tops pairs must undergo another direct election, and the pair who gained most votes will be inaugurated as President and Vice President.”
Article 159 verse (1) Act of Pilpres said, “Elected Pair is the pair who gained more than fifty per cent from the total votes with the initial of minimal twenty per cent votes from all provinces spared in at least half of all provinces in Indonesia.”
“This where the problem lays, it is clear that our Constitution only sees hopeful pair will be more than two, so the two top will qualify two the second round. But Article 6A verse 3, doesn’t necessarily mention a number of pair, it bears when it compared to Article 6A verse (4) of 1954 Constitution,” Asrun said in MK Plenary Room, Monday (16/6).
Besides, as Article 159 verse (1) Act of Pilpres is being applied, there is an impression that the two pairs may be advancing to another round if the requirement wasn’t fulfilled, while the participating pairs were only 2.
“The two pairs may compete in another round, this will extravagant the budget and may trigger hard clash between the two sides of grassroot-supporters.” He said. In another word the Article 159 verse (1) Act of Pilpres smears multi-interpretation meaning.
Area Requirement is not Needed
Meanwhile, Perludem’s attorney whose case registered upon 51/PUU-XII/2014, Wahyudi Djafar, cited split opinion over Act of Pilpres due to the different approach on interpreting Article 6A verse (3) and verse (4). “Uncertainty over the regulation potentially harmed the losing side of the election, while the winning side urges the one-rounded election,” he said,
According to MK sentence number 22-24/PUU6/2008, highest sovereignty is on the hands of the people. Thus, political legitimate must be derived from people’s willing, without the intention of area. “Whoever gained the more votes, gained people’s mandate,” he added.
Meanwhile, individual Applicant, Sunggul Hamonangan Sirait asked the legal ground for KPU to decide over presidential election. According to him, Article 159 verse (1) Act of Pilpres is irrelevant to describe the upcoming pilpres. “There are only two participating pairs, the spreading votes would be hindering them to undergo the constitutional and legit elections,”he said. (Lulu Hanifah)
Monday, June 16, 2014 | 19:42 WIB 131