Principal Applicant Habiburokhman delivers petition points at judicial review session on Act of Regional Elections, on Wednesday (19/8) at Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ganie

The Constitutional Court (Mahkamah Konstitusi –MK) holds judicial review session on regional election result cancellation which regulated in Act Number 8 Year 2015 of Act Amendment Number 1 Year 2015 concerning Government Regulation in-lieu of Law Number 1 Year 2014 of Governor, Mayor, Regent Elections Enacted to Act (Undang-Undang Nomor 8  Tahun 2015 tentang Perubahan Atas Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 2015 tentang Penetapan Peraturan Pemerintah Pengganti Undang-Undang No. 1 Tahun 2014 tentang Pemilihan Gubernur, Bupati, dan Walikota Menjadi Undang-Undang –UU Pilkada). Provision on the cancellation is particularly regulated in Article 158 (1) letter a, b, c, d and Article 158 (2) letter a, b, c, and d Act of Regional Elections.

The Applicant in Case Number 97/PUU-XIII/2015 is Great Indonesia Movement Party’s (Partai Gerakan Indonesia Raya –Gerindra) politician Habiburokhman who willing to run candidacy in 2017 Regional Election. The Applicant assesses the limitation on dispute lawsuit filing by margin no more than 2 % and the various margins in accordance with regional population, as stipulated in Article 158 Act of Regional Elections, potentially violate his constitutional rights.

“When I run candidacy then the margin is more than 2% in which I cannot file lawsuit, in my opinion it is de facto contrary to the 1945 Constitution and a backward move for the Constitutional Court, Whereas in previous Act, the filing could be done as long as the margin is significant, and even the Constitutional Court conducts massive and systematic doctrine regarding the limitation,” said him.  

Therefore, the Applicant requests the Constitutional Court to declare Article 158 (1) letter a, b, c, d and Article 158 (2) letter a, b, c, d Act of Regional Elections contrary to the Constitution if it isn’t interpreted ‘Cancellation lawsuit only regarding vote result which affect candidate pair elected and massive fraud occurred’ (‘Permohonan pembatalan hanya berkenaan dengan hasil penghitungan suara yang mempengaruhi terpilihnya pasangan calon dan terjadinya kecurangan yang bersifat TSM’).

Already Adjudicated

Responding the petition, Justice Panel led by Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna says Applicant’s petition has already filed to the Constitutional Court under Verdict Number 51/PUU-XIII/2015 in which the verdict saying inadmissible. Although the Applicant files the same norm, the touchstone used is different with previous verdict. Thus, the Applicant needs to elaborate further on petition arguments.

“If the judicial review process continued, technical matter in the petition needs to be elaborated. For example on the touchstone, petition arguments, and the contrary between the Articles reviewed with the touchstone,” said Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin.

 Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna asserts the Applicant to attach evidences, in order to strengthen Applicant’s legal standing. “If you only willing to be regional head, it seems that the intention is never be adjudicated by the Court, except if the intention to be regional head is proven,” said him. (Lulu Hanifah/Prasetyo Adi N)