---

Applicant’s Witness Abu Dawar delivered testimony in further session of South Solok election dispute, on Tuesday (2/2) in Panel Session Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ifa

 

 

 

Undistributed voting invitation C6 form becomes the main concern of South Solok election dispute, as revealed on Tuesday’s (2/2) further session, in Panel Session Room, the Constitutional Court. Applicant’s Witnesses Khairunas and Edi Susanto justified Applicant’s argument saying C6 forms weren’t distributed to several villages. A lot of voters didn’t use their voting rights due to it, according to the Applicant.

Applicant’s Witness Abu Dawar claimed he saw a number of C6 form was left in his car. He assumed the forms were belonged to Nagari Talao election committee head Darminto that should be delivered to voters. “In December 8, 2015, he (Darminto, ed.) and I accompanied with polices monitored polling station preparation by my car,” said him in the session of Case No. 72/PHP.BUP/XIV/2016.

Responding Dawar’s testimony, Chief Justice Arief Hidayat as panel head then reprimanded him. Arief said witnesses supposed to provide information based on what they exactly know, instead of on mere assumption. Only experts that able to provide opinions or assumptions, he added.

Moreover, Arief questioned several things related to undistributed C6 forms. “How many C6 forms that found in your car?” asked him.

Dawar said there were 500 C6 forms he found. However, because her son used several form for playing, there were only 178 forms left. He said that undistributed forms caused voters cancelled to use their voting rights, because some of them didn’t know that the form can be substituted by ID card (KTP).

Meanwhile, Applicant’s Expert I Gusti Putu Artha argued the undistributed forms should be examined deeper in order to figure out the motive. The motive could be technical or political motive, Artha added.

“The political motive is using the ignorance of people regarding the replacement use of KTP for voting. Such ignorance causes their voting rights lost and benefits certain candidate pair,” said him. Artha further said that election organizer was not professional if undistributed form occurred due to technical motive. 

Optimal Socialization

Respondent’s (South Solok election commission) Witness Nila Puspita said the election commission had conducted election socialization optimally. The election commission’s logistic division member said the socialization had been done up to district (kecamatan) level. Therefore, voters had been informed about the use of KTP for replacing C6 form.

She also said the election commission had given time from December 6 until December 8 for complaining about C6 form. “So far, there is no report or protest addressed to the district election committee and the election commission,” said him in the session

Regarding undistributed forms, Nila said the forms could be undistributed due to several reasons, among others were form recipient passed away, recipient moved, doubled form, the form recipient’s domicile was hard to be reached.

“For example in Sangir Balai Janggo which is plantation are. A lot of seasonal workers in there, therefore the distribution of C6 form become difficult,” said her explaining. (Arif Satriantoro/lul)

---