After controversial frenzy aroused amongst people, the bill of regional election (UU Pilkada) finally being challenged in judicial review held on Monday (10/13). The case was petitioned by National Democratic Party, Indo Survey and Strategy, Pro-Jokowi Volunteers, Confederation of Indonesian Workforce United (KSPSI), Indonesian Women Coalition (KPI), and several individual Plaintiffs.  

In the hearing, MK Chief Deputy Arief Hidayat reminded the Plaintiffs that object of the petition is terminated due to lieu of law issued by President on October 2, 2014. Therefore, preliminary hearing and petition checking will be forcefully handled in one go. “There are two possibilities, after the trial, the petition might be revoked, or proceeds without the object, so there will be no advices,” he explained in MK Plenary room.

In accordance with Arief’s explanation, several plaintiffs decided to revoke their pleadings, Indo Survey and Strategy and KSPSI are two to revoke their petitions. Andi Asrun, Indo Survey and Strategy’s attorney, expressed that by the lieu of law being published there is no need for his side to process the petition. However, Asrun suggested the people to apply for material review on pilkada lieu of law. “For the sake of democracy’s development, we suggest the people to oversee the lieu of law by applying to MK so the lieu of law may be declared constitutional,” he said.

Nasdem showed different deeds by keeping the petition proceed to assess MK’s view on the ruling. “We want to figure opinion from the justices, probably dissenting opinion emerge which is larger (in effect) to review the lieu of law,” he said.

Nasdem as the Plaintiff called for Constitutional reviews of Article 2 UU Pilkada in which governor chosen by Province DPRD voting. Nasdem sees that the ruling gives privilege to majority political party in Province DPRD. As a result, democracy curbed, politics will be more transactional in elite level.

Pro-Jokowi volunteers still mulling to process the petition, the chief, Budi Arie Setiadi said that the ruling clashes with Article 30 verse (5) juncto Article 34 Act 32/2004 in which regional executives are chosen by people. The clashes emit legal uncertainty and for that reason must be declared non-binding.  “We ponder further implication whether UU Pilkada may be proposed as an Act again. We thought that it is possible if we take any precaution examination if dissenting opinion issued so that the Act may not be revived,” Fatahillah said.  

Amongst the nine, two Plaintiffs called for formal review, namely Indo Survey and Strategy and Banjarnegara Regent candidate, Budhi Sarwono. Those Plaintiffs acted as individual citizen objecting the ruling which was challenged for its flaws and dire potential. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh)