Plenary judicial review hearing of the Election Law, Thursday (17/1) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

The Constitutional Court once again held the judicial review hearing of Article 92 paragraph (2) letter c along the phrase “3 (three) or 5 (five” in Law Number 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law) on Thursday (17/1) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. The hearing of the petition by entrepreneurs Palaloi, Abdul Rasyid, Sitefano Gulo, and Alex, as well as university student Melianus Laoli, had been scheduled to hear the statements by the House and expert for the Petitioner. However, the hearing was then postponed because the Petitioner submitted the expert’s written statement late.

Chief Justice Anwar Usman asked the Petitioners to submit the expert\'s CV on January 15, 2019, and the written statement on January 16, 2019. The rules for proceedings at the Constitutional Court stipulate that receipt of CV and written statement of the expert must be submitted at least two days before the hearing. "Therefore, the Petitioners are given a choice to present the Expert in the next hearing [or not]. Or will the written statement suffice?" Justice Anwar asked Mustafa Kamal Singadirata as attorney for Case No. 93/PUU-XVI/2018. 

Mustafa expressed his wish to present the statement of the Expert that had been submitted. Justice Anwar then postponed the hearing until Thursday, January 31, 2019 at 11.00 WIB, to hear the statements of the Petitioners\' expert and the House of Representatives. 

In the previous session, the Petitioners conveyed that elections of integrity and dignity will not take place optimally considering there are only five organizing members to only three Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Agency) members in carrying out the elections. The addition of personnel is necessary to balance the personnel or members of the District/Municipal Bawaslu in supervisory in order to achieve democratic elections. In addition, according to Mustafa, in the implementation of the 2019 Elections Bawaslu will have a lot of workload and meet complex issues so there is concern that election-related violations will be on District/Municipal Bawaslu.  Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioners requested the Court to declare the a quo article along with the elucidation and attachment to the phrase "3 (three) or 5 (five) people" contrary to the 1945 Constitution and not have binding legal force insofar as it is not interpreted as 5 (five) people. (Sri Pujianti/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)