Safaruddin as a Relevant Party delivering his statement in the judicial review hearing of the Elections Law, Tuesday (24/10) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court Building. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court (MK) once again held a hearing for case No. 61/PUU-XV/2017, 66/PUU-XV/2017, and 75/PUU-XV/2017 in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court Building. The hearing this time was to listen to the statements of the Government and Relevant Parties in Cases 61/PUU-XV/2017 and 66/PUU-XV/2017. The Relevant Parties providing information are the Aceh People Advocacy Foundation and three Acehnese individuals namely the Aceh Voters Supervisory Committee (Panwaslih) Samsul Bahri, Former Member of North Aceh Panwaslih Ismunazar, and Muhammad A. H.

Safaruddin as the representative of the Aceh People Advocacy Foundation gave testimony on Case 66/PUU-XV/2017 filed by the Chairman of the Aceh Legislative Council (DPRA) Tengku Muharuddin. In relation to the Petitioner’s argument who objects to the revocation of Articles 57 and 60 paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) of the Aceh Government Law (UUPA) due to the enactment of Article 571 letter (d) of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections, Safaruddin said that it is beneficial to the Aceh region. Especially, he continued, in terms of reduction of expenses that can then be allocated for development. In addition, the articles in UUPA are claimed by the Relevant Party as outdated. "Therefore, it needs to be adjusted to the latest legislation so that it will follow current dynamics in society," explained Safaruddin.

In relation to legal standing, Safaruddin explained that the Petitioner’s status as a member of the regional council who challenges the a quo norm indicates inconsistency of the Government of Aceh, both the governor and the Aceh local government officials. "The absence of the governor in this case indicates his support for the enactment of the a quo article," he stressed.

Meanwhile, regarding Case 61/PUU-XV/2017 filed by Kautsar and Samsul Bahri, Safaruddin stated that the Petitioners cannot explain factual or potential constitutional harm due to the implementation of the a quo article. In addition, to the assumption that the enactment of the a quo article eliminates the rights of members of the Aceh Province Elections Independent Commission (KIP), Safaruddin explained that the substance of the petition seemed to have lost its main point . "Therefore, the Petitioners should focus on their constitutional damages, not damages that are not covered by the a quo article," Safaruddin said before a hearing led by Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Arief Hidayat.

For Aceh Peace

On the next occasion, Samsul Bahri (Chairman of Aceh Panwaslih) also gave his statement on Case 66/PUU-XV/2017. Related to the revocation of Article 57 and 60 paragraphs (1), (2), and (4) of the UUPA, Samsul revealed that it is motivated by historical aspect and the aspect of constitutional recognition and consistency contained therein. The historical aspect, i.e. the a quo law, is essentially present to create peace in Aceh and in the context of creating peace in Aceh, in order for the a quo law to function fully. As for the aspect of constitutional recognition and consistency, Samsul emphasized that it highly concerns the special status of Aceh that is regulated by law. "Thus, the implementation of UUPA is the Government\\'s recognition of Aceh\\'s special status. In the context of UUPA it should be noted that no Aceh authority is revoked, which is a form of government inconsistency for Aceh," explained Samsul.

Consistent with Ismunazar\\'s view, Muhammad A.H. as another Relevant Party also mentioned the revocation of UUPA, which is considered contrary to the special status of Aceh. He, on the contrary, actually regarded it a form of state recognition of the government of Aceh, which is different from other provinces. "So, the change of regulation including the revocation of the article is actually needed in order to follow the dynamics in society," explained Muhammad.

At the end of the hearing, Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Arief also stated that the hearing would be continued on Monday, November 13, 2017 to hear the statements of Experts and Witnesses from the Petitioners of Cases XV/2017 and 66/PUU-XV/2017. As for Case 75/PUU-XV/2017, two members of the Aceh KIP, Hendra Fauzi and Robby Syahputra, as well as Ferry Munandar who is an election observer/activist will be scheduled at a later time. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)