Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna with Secretary General M. Guntur Hamzah and Registrar Kasianur Sidauruk in a press conference, Thursday (20/9) at the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court held a press conference Thursday (20/9/2018) at the Main Lobby of the Constitutional Court. Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna with Secretary General M. Guntur Hamzah and Registrar Kasianur Sidauruk affirmed the Constitutional Court Decision No. 30/PUU-XVI/2018 in response to the news of the statement of Vice Chairman of Regional Representatives Council (DPD) Nono Sampono, that the aforementioned decision dated July 23, 2018 would only apply in the 2024 general election.

On Wednesday afternoon (19/9), several DPD leaders including Vice Chairman I Nono Sampono, Vice Chairman III Akhmad Muquwam, Head of Committee I Benny Ramdani, had had an audience with the Constitutional Court, represented by Chief Justice Anwar Usman, Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto, Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna, Secretary General M. Guntur Hamzah, and Court Registrars.

Justice Palguna said that in the meeting, DPD leaders affirmed their stance in not interfering with and in respecting the Court’s decision, but they asked for confirmation on several things. The Court explained that the Court would not and could not interpret Constitutional Court Decisions in casu Decision No. 30/PUU-XVI/2018 dated July 23, 2018. “[The Court] merely explained its legal consideration in the ruling as stated in the a quo decision,” he said.

The Court’s legal consideration of the a quo case reads, “Considering that in the 2019 elections, as the registration of DPD candidates has started, in the event that there is a DPD candidate who is also an administrator of a political party who is affected by this decision, the KPU may give the candidate in question an opportunity to remain a DPD candidate as long as they have declared their resignation from the management of the political party as evidenced by a legal written statement regarding said resignation. Henceforth, DPD members since the 2019 Elections and future general elections who are political party administrators go against the 1945 Constitution.”

Justice Palguna also said that in the meeting, in relation to the a quo decision, since Decision No. 10/PUU-VI/2008 the Court had never roll back its ruling in relation to the requirements for DPD candidates not affiliated with political parties. “The decision was later reaffirmed in a number of subsequent Court Decisions, including Decision Number 92/PUU-X/2012, 79/PUU-XII/2014, as also detailed in the legal considerations of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30/PUU-XVI/2018,” he explained.

Applies to 2019 Elections

Justice Palguna stressed that the Court never stated that the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30/PUU-XVI/2018 would only apply since the 2024 general elections. He added that pursuant to Article 47 of Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court as revised by Law No. 8 of 2011 that the Constitutional Court decisions is legally binding since its pronouncement in a public plenary hearing.

In response to the question of whether Constitutional Court decisions can be used by the KPU as a reference in drafting PKPU, Justice Palguna affirmad that Constitutional Court decisions equals laws, which makes the Constitutional Court a negative legislator. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)