Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Arief Hidayat and Constitutional Judge M.Alim during verdict announcement session in judicial review on Act of Legislative Institutions (UU Pemilihan Legislatif –UU Pileg) which was not attended by the Applicant, on Wednesday March 11 at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building (Gedung Mahkamah Konstitusi). Photo PR/Ganie     

The Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi –MK) reaffirms that noken-system election is still justifiable, however the argument is only applicable in particular time and places where never been conduct direct-vote election. Therefore, MK rejects the entire petition filed by legislative candidate from Papua Province Isman Ismail Asso.   

“(We) declare to reject the Applicant petition in its entirely,” stated Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Arief Hidayat on Wednesday March 11, at Plenary Room MK.

In legal consideration, the Court assessed the utilization of noken-system on General Election is merely casuistically, which at that time it still neede by most of Papua communities. “Therefore, the Court argues that noken-system is no need to be specifically-regulated on Act of the General Election (Undang-Undang Pemilu),” said Constitutional Judge Muhammad Alim.

Then, the Applicant argued the phrase ‘perforating (mencoblos)’ on Article 154 Act No.8/2012 was considered not contradicted conditionally with Article 18B (2) and Article 28I (3) The 1945 Constitution, which is constitutional as it interpreted “voting conducted with noken-system” in terms: a. is not generally applied in Papua; b. is locally and concrete; c. is not violate The General Election (Pemilihan Umum –Pemilu) principals which honest and fair”. Toward the petitum, according to the Court, the Applicant did not explain in detail which area could use noken-system. “Moreover, the Court is also has no authority to determine the area that shall use noken-system during Pemilu,” added Alim.     

In order to ensure legal certainty, for certain areas that already used direct-voting system, they no longer able to use noken, bundles, and other similar system. According to the Court as explained by Alim it is indeed for some places that still used noken, bundles, and other similar system, are expected to switch to perforate (coblos) method or other methods stipulated on the Act. Therefore, socialization by election organizer is needed intensively and continually. “Based on the entire legal assessment above, according to the Court, the Applicant’s petition has no legal ground,” stated him.  

In the petition, the Applicant argues that the voting system that only by perforating the ballot as noted on Article 154 Act of Legislative Election is contrary to Article 18B (2) of The 1945 Constitution. Article 154 Act of Legislative Election mentions "Voting for the election of the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat –DPR), Regional Representatives Council (Dewan Perwakilan Daerah –DPD), Provincial Legislative Council (DPRD provinsi), and Regional Legislative Council (DPRD kabupaten/kota) is conducted by perforating one time on the number or political party symbol and / or the name of the candidate on the ballot ". In the practice of elections in Indonesia, the Applicant explains, particularly in some districts in the Central Mountains Region of Papua (Wilayah Pegunungan Tengah Papua), voting is not done by perforating ballots, but using bundle-vote system (sistem ikat suara) or acclamation or agreement known as the noken system. In fact, the Applicant continues, in several disputes on Regional Head (Kepala Daerah) and Deputy Head (Wakil Kepala Daerah) of Papua election results, the Constitutional Court in its verdict had acknowledged noken-system voting as a practice based on local customs that guaranteed by The 1945 Constitution.

It arise the issue on the public because formal provisions on Article 154 Act of Legislative Election (Pemilihan Legislatif –Pileg) and Technical Regulation of The General Elections Commission (Peraturan Teknis Komisi Pemilihan Umum) firmly stated the voting in legislative elections conducted by perforating, so Papua Province General Elections Commission (Komisi Pemilihan Umum Provinsi Papua) refused to accept noken-system voting in future Pileg. According to the Applicant, The Act-maker and election organizer shall not violates the acknowledgement and unity protection of indigenous communities and their traditional rights as guaranteed on Article 18B the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, the Applicant filed to MK that the implementation of phrase ‘perforating’ on Article 154 Act of Legislative Election is applied conditionally constitutional. (Lulu Anjarsari/Prasetyo Adi N)