Wrong Object Leads Dairy Regency Election Petition to Be Dismissed
Image


Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna reading out the legal considerations in the ruling hearing of the 2018 Dairi Regency election results dispute, Thursday (9/8) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Gani.

The Petitioners of the 2018 Dairi Regency election results dispute case Depriwanto Sitohang and Azhar Bintang (Candidate Pair Number 1) requested that the Court disqualify Candidate Pair Number 2 Keleng Berutu-Jimmy Andrea Sihombing on account of administrative violation. The Court stated that it was outside its purview, said Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna reading out the legal considerations of Decision No. 63/PHP.BUP-XVI/2018 on Thursday (9/8/2018) in the Plenary Courtroom.

The Court stated that based on Article 4 of the Constitutional Court Regulation No. 5 of 2017, the object of the petition as well as the evidence and facts of the hearing were not on the Dairy Regency KPU Decree No. 85/PL.03.6-Kpt/1211/KPU-Kab/VII/2018, so that the Court did not have the authority to decide on the petition.

Only Objection

In the same session, the Court also dismissed the petition No. 43/PHP.KOT-XVI/2018 on the 2018 Palopo City election dispute case petitioned by Candidate Pair Number 2 Akhmad Syarifuddin Daud and Budi Sada. The petition only detailed the Petitioners\' objection as the Palopo City KPU (Respondent) had ignored the Panwas\' recommendation as well as the Petitioners\' wish for the declaration of the election winners to be delayed.

The Court also dismissed the petition No. 33/PHP.BUP-XVI/2018 on the 2018 Talaud Island election dispute case because the Court was not authorized to decide on the case, as the object of the petition was not the mistake in the vote count results, but the recapitulation report.

Legal Standing 

The Court also ruled petitions No. 11/PHP.BUP-XVI/2018, 44/PHP.BUP-XVI/2018, and 2/PHP.KOT-XVI/2018, on Sinjai Regency, Deiyai Regency, and Parepare City. The Court stated that the Petitioners did not have legal standing. (Sri Pujianti/LA)

Translated by: Yuniar Widiastuti


Thursday, August 09, 2018 | 18:39 WIB 102