---

The expression of Applicant’s Attorney Taufik Basari after hearing interlocutory decision of Bintuni Bay election dispute, on Thursday (25/2), in Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ganie

 

 

 

After a long series of court proceedings, the Constitutional Court issues interlocutory decision (putusan sela) ordering Bintuni Bay (Teluk Bintuni) election commission to conduct re-voting in polling station 1 in Moyeba village, North Moskona district. Chief Justice Arief Hidayat declared the decision of Bintuni Bay election dispute on Thursday (25/2), in Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. As known, the dispute lawsuit was filed by candidate pair Petrus Kasihiw-Matret Kokop.

“Orders Bintuni Bay election commission to conduct 2015 regent-deputy regent election re-voting in polling station 1 in Moyeba village, North Moskona district,” said Arief accompanied by eight other Constitutional Justices.

The Court assessed the strikethrough vote recapitulation didn’t automatically make the vote recapitulation as written in C1-KWK Plano form in polling station 1 in Moyeba village as the correct recapitulation. Prior to the write-off, the Court assessed that polling station working committee (KPPS) head Soter Orocomna had committed violated by perforating ballots. Therefore, the Court argued re-voting should be done in polling station 1 in Moyeba village.

In Court’s verdict, the Court provided 30 workdays since the date of the decision issued for conducting re-voting. The Court also ordered the Respondent to immediately report the re-voting to the Court within 7 workdays since the recapitulation conducted. 

Ballot Box Opening

In previous session, the Court ordered ballot boxes opening for comparing testimonies with disputed parties’ evidence because there were several documents which full of strikethrough and inconsistent with vote recapitulation.

Found irregularities, Justice Panel led by Constitutional Justice Patrialis Akbar then ordered the Respondent to complete evidence. Under Justice Panel’s ordered, the Respondent brought one ballot box which contained vote recapitulation documents.

After the box opened, some discrepancies found, among others was the documents and perforating tools from four polling stations were stored and separated into six separated plastic bags.

The Court also figured out that C1-KWK Plano of polling station 1 was full of strikethrough and number modification. Candidate pair number 1’s vote result was changed from 1 vote to zero vote, candidate pair number 2’s (the Applicant) vote result was changed from 126 votes to 8 votes, and candidate pair number 3’s (the Related Party) who previously got 405 votes was changed into 526 votes.

“Regarding the modification of C1-KWK Plano form, it is revealed in court session that the C1-KWK form has the same number with the modified C1-KWK Plano form. The numbers and letters/writing stated prior to the modification are still clearly seen,” said Constitutional Justice Patrialis Akbar.

Based on all legal considerations above, the Court argued Applicant’s argument regarding the modification of vote result in polling station 1 in Moyeba village was proven and had legal grounds. (Yusti Nurul Agustin/lul/Prasetyo Adi N)

---