---

Candidate pair number 2 Zulfahri Abdullah was interviewed by media after verdict announcement session of Sula election dispute, on Thursday (12/5) in Plenary Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Photo PR/Ifa

 

 

 

The Constitutional Court (MK) issued final verdict of Sula regional election dispute on Thursday (12/5). The verdict justified the winning of candidate pair Hendrate Thes and Zulfahri Abdullah (Related Party) in 2015 Sula regional election.

“Order the Respondent to conduct this verdict. Reject Applicant’s objection in its entirely,” said Chief Justice Arief Hidayat accompanied by other Constitutional Justices in verdict announcement session of Case No. 100/PHP.BUP-XIV/2016.

Previously, the Court issued interlocutory decision ordering election rerun in 11 polling stations in four districts in Sula Islands regency. In legal consideration, the Court declared Applicant’s argument arguing mobilization of 13 voters who later registered in additional voter list by domicile letter, is proven. Sula election commission had reported election rerun result to the Court in April 18, 2016.

The Court determined election rerun result of 2015 Sula regional election as followed; candidate pair number one Rusmin Latara-M. Saleh Marasabessy gains 11,166 votes, candidate pair number two Hendrata Thes-Zulfahri Abdullah (Related Party) gains 18,508 votes, candidate pair number three Safi Pauwah-Faruk Bahanan (Applicant) gains 18,322 votes.

In the petition, the Applicant argues Sula election monitoring committee ignores their report concerning election violation that occurred in election rerun in March 28, 2016. Regarding the argument aforementioned, the Court consider that there were 8 violations which already followed up to the Election Organizers Honorary Council and the violations were not proven.  

Based on election rerun report, the Court assessed election monitoring committee had optimally done supervision in 11 polling stations, formed field monitoring committee and polling station supervisor, ensured the update of voter list and additional voter list, distributed logistics, ensured that campaign not occurred, ensured village officials and civil servants not involved in campaigning candidate pair and in activities that advantage or disadvantage certain candidate, and reported supervision activity periodically.

Therefore, the Court assessed that the election monitoring committee had followed up each violation reports. The Court determined that Applicant’s argument arguing negligence of violation report has no legal ground. The Court considered that it is not relevant anymore to hold session for hearing witness testimony as requested by the Applicant in the session dated April 18, 2016.

Regarding violations occurred before and during election rerun, the Court assessed that there is no evidence that convince the Court about the significance impact of violations to the vote gained by candidate pair.

“However, if the violations truly occurred, quod non, the violations can still able to be handled by competent parties,” said Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna reading Court’s Opinion. (Nano Tresna Arfana/lul/Prasetyo Adi N)

 

---