---

Principal Petitioner Dorel Amir delivering the main points of the judicial review petition of the Election Law on Wednesday (5/9) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing on the material review of Law No. 7/2017 on Elections on Wednesday (5/9). This petition registered as No. 67/PUU-XVI/2018 was submitted by member of the Golongan Karya Party, Dorel Amir. 

The Petitioner had registered as a legislative candidate (bacaleg) of the House of Representatives in the electoral district of West Sumatra II through the Golkar Party. He felt disadvantaged by the enactment of Article 240 paragraph (1) letter n of the Election Law regarding the absence of regulations on the time limit of political party membership to become a legislative candidate. 

As an ordinary member of the Golkar Party, the Petitioner cannot immediately arrange the requirements for legislative candidate recruitment in political parties, that regional legislative candidates must be members of the party within a certain time limit. According to Petitioner\'s knowledge, there is no new membership opening in the Golkar Party at the time of the registration of legislative candidates. 

The Petitioner observed that many legislative candidates were actually not cadres from the parties who registered them. He suspected that these candidates were recruited as legislative candidates because they have something other than qualifications and understanding of politics. Therefore, the Petitioner requested a material review of Article 240 paragraph (1) letter n of the Election Law, which reads, "Candidates for House of Representatives, provincial Legislative Council, and district/municipal Legislative Council are Indonesian citizens and must fulfill the following requirements: n. A member of a political party participating in the general elections." 

The Petitioner argued that before the a quo law was promulgated, the bill on the election of legislative members, the president and vice president, as well as the implementation of elections will contain a norm stipulating that legislative candidates in the 2019 Elections are required to have at least one year membership of a political party so the they are expected to have received political education from their political parties and understand their main duties. 

"If the requirement for a legislative candidate a membership of a political party for at least one year is granted by the Constitutional Court, the Petitioner thinks it is still quite relevant to be applied to new political parties because actually the establishment of a political party is not sudden and hasty," the Petitioner explained. 

With the requirement for legislative candidates to become members of a political party for at least 1 year, the political parties participating in the elections will have a very strategic role in determining the quality and feasibility of regional and national candidates. 

According to the Petitioner, the requirement to become a member of the political party participating in the election for at least 1 year for legislative candidates is a need for the community to have a choice of qualified representatives of the people in fighting for and defending the interests of society, nation, and state. 

Concise 

Regarding the Petitioner\'s argument, Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna commented, "I have not seen any argument and reason of the petition that state that the formulation [of the norm] is contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, especially Article 28D paragraph (1). Where is the conflict with Article 28D paragraph (1)? It is not seen in the description of this petition," he said. 

Therefore, Justice Palguna added, the Petitioner should elaborate on the argument so that the constitutional impairment could be seen. According to him, the Petitioner only explained a few things. "[The petition] only summarizes in the final part the reason for the petition by mentioning Article 28D paragraph (1)," he added. 

The same thing was expressed by Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Aswanto as chairman of the panel of justices. He requested that the Petitioner elaborate on his constitutional rights that were violated by the existence of instant candidates. 

"This is what I think has not been well elaborated. Maybe we can even see some instant candidates who succeeded, but not all instant candidates succeed. In my opinion, you also need to [explain] with your argument that if there are instant candidates, you feel disadvantaged. So you have to explain the argument because it has not been elaborated comprehensively," he said. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)

---