---

Respondent’s Attorney Marhuma Majid denied Applicant’s argument in Gowa election dispute further session, on Thursday (14/1) in Panel Session Room 1, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ifa

 

 

 

Sula Election Commission denied regent-deputy regent candidate pair Safi-Pauwah-Faruk Bahanan’s arguments, Respondent’s Attorney Hedi Hudaya delivered in further session of Case Number 100-137-141/PHP.BUP-XIV/2016, in Panel Session Room 1, the Constitutional Court Building.   

The Respondent denied election commission partiality in Sula election. Regarding Applicant’s vote reduction, the Respondent argued there was no objection from entire candidate pair’s witnesses regarding vote result. “Applicant’s witnesses and other candidate pair’s witnesses had signed C-1 form. No objection from them either in polling-station-level recapitulation or in district-level recapitulation,” explained Hudaya.

Regarding vote reduction from voter list amounted to 40 votes, the Respondent explained that it was a merely writing error. The Respondent had conduct revision on the error. “It was written in voter list that there were 317 voters. It should be written 357 voters. Therefore, it just a merely writing error,” said Hudaya.

Election Commission Denies Flawed Qualification Allegation

In the same session, Justice Panel 1 also examined Gowa regent-deputy regent candidate pair Andi Maddusila-Wahyu Permana’s lawsuit (Case Number 137/BHP.BUP-XIV/216). Regarding Applicant’s claim saying candidate pair number 5 Purichta-Malaganni had flawed qualification, Gowa Election Commission denied such claim. The election commission as Respondent argued that the Applicant supposed to be filed the problem during candidacy stage.

“Regarding (Related Party’s, ed.) flawed qualification, the Applicant supposes to complain the identity card problem which indicated fake during candidacy stage. Regarding the candidate pair number 5’s Police Notes Certificate (SKCK, ed.), the election commission as organizer only authorized to receive and examine the certificate file, not to declare the validity of the file,” said him. 

Meanwhile regarding election committee members who allegedly committed violation, the Respondent admitted that the problem was settled. The Respondent had replaced the committee members who allegedly brought candidate pair documents, as recommended by Gowa election monitoring committee.

“Regarding the violation that committed by election monitoring committee members, the Respondent never ignored such problem. The Respondent directly made decision on repeat voting in Bontolempangan district on Monday December 14, 2015,” explained Respondent’s Attorney Marhuma Majid.

Justice Panel 1 also examined Respondent’s, Related Party’s, and Testimony Giver Party’s answer in Ternate election dispute further session (Case Number 112/PHP-KOT-XIV/2016) and in Selayar election dispute further session (Case Number 141/PHP.BUP-XIV/2016). As known, Ternate candidate pair Dero Siokona-Djasman Abubakar and Selayar candidate pair Saiful Arif-Muh. Junaedy Faisal filed lawsuit respectively. (Lulu Anjarsari/lul/Prasetyo Adi N)

---