---

Applicant’s Attorney Ahmad Irawan delivered petition revision at judicial review session on Act of Regional Elections, on Monday (6/7) at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ganie

 

 

Pinrang Regent candidate Irwan Hamid revised petition towards provision which regulated the definition of conflict of interest in Article 7 letter r Act Number 8 Year 2015 of Act Amendment Number 1 Year 2015 of Stipulation on Government Regulation in lieu of Law Number 1 Year 2014 of Governor, Regent, and Mayor Election Enacted to Act (Undang-Undang Nomor 8 Tahun 2015 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2015 tentang Penetapan Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang Nomor 1 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati, dan Walikota Menjadi Undang-Undang –UU Pilkada). The second session of Case Number 79/PUU-XIII/2015 was held on Monday (6/7), at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building.

At the session, Applicant’s Attorney Ahmad Irawan delivered that the Applicant already conducted petition revision. However, the revision wasn’t reached the substance of petition. In other words, the revision only conducted on petition systematic and writing revision.

“Related to the revision, Your Honor, the first is related to the authority of the Constitutional Court. In this revision we already noted related to Act of Judicial Authority (Undang-Undang Kekuasaan Kehakiman), which is Article 29 (1) Act Number 48 Year 2009. The second revision is on the petition petitum, Your Honor. We already noted on point III that article and its elucidation which we reviewed are contrary to the 1945 Constitution and we requested it declared had no legal binding. Moreover related to the phrase writing, we replaced the word ‘phrase’ with ‘word’ in entire petition, whether in the conclusion or the posita, Your Honor,” said Irawan in front of Justice Panel led by Constitutional Justice Patrialis Akbar.

Moreover, Irawan also reasserted that the Applicant didn’t extend the petition. The Applicant remained sue the word ‘brother/sister-in-law’, ‘parents-in-law’ and ‘son/daughter-in-law’ in Article 7 letter r Act of Regional Elections. According to the Applicant, all of those three words were most related to Applicant’s constitutional interest.

Responding the arguments, Patrialis said the Justie Panel would never ask the number of experts or witnesses who summoned by the Applicant. It because similar cases related to judicial review on Act of Regional Elections was considered a lot. Therefore, the Court assessed had enough to take decision. The regional elections were also getting closer, so the Court assessed that the case regarding the regional elections, including this case was enough. “Regarding on your case, the Court assesses it is enough. Without summoning experts or witnesses, we will plan this case to be adjudicated with other similar cases,” Patrialis explained.

After hearing Court explanation, the Applicant agreed. The Applicant still allowed attaching evidences in form of experts writing testimony and its conclusion.

Previously, the Applicant felt objected with one of the definitions of conflict of interest which stated ‘brother/sister-in-law’ as one of the blood ties which potentially caused conflict of interest. The Applicant felt the provision was violated his constitutional rights, because the Applicant couldn’t control his brother and sister to marry with certain people. It became detrimental for him if his brother/sister-in-law became regional head, because the Applicant suddenly responsible politically as a result of marriage conducted by his brother/sister.

The Applicant assessed the inclusion of brother/sister-in-law into the definition of relation which possibly caused conflict of interest, was because political phenomenon of regional elections in several regions. Although brother/sister-in-law relations in several regions could potentially cause conflict of interest between the incumbent with the candidate, the Applicant denied similar things could occurred on him. “It is very different with Applicant experience which in fact became the rival of his brother-in-law in two regional elections; 2013 and 2008 Pinrang regional elections,” explained Applicant’s Attorney who also a constitutional law expert Andi Irmanputra Sidin at the preliminary session which held on Wednesday (1/7). (Yusti Nurul Agustin/Prasetyo Adi N)

 

 

---