In accordance to the ruling of Act 23/2014 about regional government (UU Pemda), Constitution and legal study forum (FKHK) considered to not presenting any expert or witness. It was delivered by Kurniawan as Petitioner’s attorney in judicial review on which held on Wednesday (10/15) at MK Plenary room.  

“Beforehand, we apologize, we actually have prepared the experts and witnesses. […] Our object has been removed by the new UU Pemda, so there is no need to present experts,” he described.

In response to the opinion, Arief replied if the object has been removed. Only two options emerged, to revoke the petition or to delegate the petition as the object removed. “there is no need to proceed the hearing,” he said.

Plaintiffs argued the equivocal pemilukada regulation. Article 56 verse (1) of Regional Government Act (UU Pemda) and Article 1 number 4 Election Accomplishment Act (UU Penyelenggaraan Pemilu) are seen to oppose 1945 Constitution. Both Articles are pleaded by Constitutional and Law Study Forum and several individual Plaintiffs. Article 56 verse (1) Regional Government Act and Article 1 number 4 Election Accomplishment Act is seen opposing Article 18 verse (4) 1945 Constitution, because none of them retain “directly elected” phrase, instead the phrase implied in limited way by citing “democratically elected”. “Both Articles defy legal principles in legal norms.

Moreover, Plaintiff stated that the pemilukada isn’t included in Article 22E verse (2) 1945 Constitution. As the Articles cites that the fair and clean election is the national five-year mill election. (Lulu Anjarsari/mh/kun)