Hearing on South Central Timor District Election Results Dispute Settlement (PHP) was once again held by the Constitutional Court (MK), Wednesday (1/8). The South Central Timor District Elections Commission (KPU) represented by attorney Arief Effendi denied the allegation of ballot stuffing. Arief stated that if such a thing had occurred, if would still not have affected the results of the South Central Timor Regional Election.

The Petitioner had previously accused the Respondent of inflating the votes for Candidate Pair Number 3 Egusem Piether Tahun-Johny Army Konay and a reduction in votes for Candidate Pair Number 2 Obed Naitboho-Alexander Kase as the Petitioners. The Petitioners argued that in the calculation of the South Central Timor District KPU, the Relevant Party received additional 166 votes, while the Petitioners\' votes decreased by 89.

"Based on the recapitulation of the district vote count results as determined by the object of the dispute, the Petitioners acquired 67,751 votes and the Relevant Party 68,488 votes. So, the margin between the Relevant Party and the Petitioners is 737 votes. The Petitioners\' petition on allegation of inflating and reducing votes does not meet the significant requirement of vote acquisition that affects the election of the candidate pair," Arief explained on Case No. 61/PHP.BUP-XVI/2018.

If the Petitioners\' argument was deemed true, Arief added, the final votes for the Petitioners would increase by 89 votes from the original 67,751 votes to 67,840 votes. Likewise, if the Petitioners\' argument was deemed true, the final votes for the Relevant Party would be reduced by 166 votes from the original 68,488 votes to 68,322 votes. Thus, the final votes for the Petitioners would be 67,840 votes while the Relevant Party 68,322 votes so the votes for the Relevant Party would still be higher than for the Petitioners.

In addition, Arief said, the argument was groundless according to law because the Petitioners used comparative data whose sources were unclear and different from the official data issued by the Respondent. For example, he added, the data in the form of the DA1-KWK model were submitted by the Petitioners in North Amanatun Sub-district. According to the Petitioners, he added, the data was different from the C1-KWK data; apparently the data in the DA1-KWK issued by the Respondent was the same as C1-KWK from Sono Village, North Amanatun Sub-district.

In the same session, the Court also heard the election result dispute of the North Tapanuli District. Legal counsel of the Respondent, North Tapanuli District Election Commissiom (KPU), Elvis Hasibuan said that the Petitioners\' argument was wrong, groundless, and was only an assumption as the Petitioners could not prove voters who double-voted.

"The Petitioners could not mention [the polling stations]. In our opinion, no voters used their voting rights more than once because they have been restricted to only use their voting rights once," he stated on Cases No. 40/PHP.BUP-XVI/2018 and 42/PHP.BUP-XVI/2018. 

In addition, he added, the voting was in accordance with the voters\' attendance list, because during the election in each polling station no multiple voters were found. It can also be proven by ink marks on each finger of voters who had used their voting rights, so voters could not vote more than once.

On invalid certificates, Elvis revealed that [KPU] had accommodated the right of each voter to be able to exercise their voting right, even though they were not registered in the DPT, by requesting them to showing e-ID or a certificate.

"Voters can be included in the additional voter list. The Respondent does not have the authority to[restrict] anyone who wants to exercise their right to vote. Although not registered in the DPT, if the voter can show their identity as a local citizen, either [with] an electronic ID or a certificate, the Respondent must accommodate the right of the voter," he said firmly. (Arif/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)