---

Panel judicial review hearing of the Election Law, Thursday (7/2) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas Mk/Ganie.

Law students of As-Sayfiiyah Islam University Ahmad Syauqi, Ammar Saifullah, Taufiqurrahman Arief, Khairul Hadi, Yun Frida Isnaini, and Zhillan Zhalilan requested the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections to the Constitutional Court. The preliminary hearing on Thursday (7/2/2019) in the Plenary Courtroom was presided over by Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna, accompanied by Constitutional Justices Wahiduddin Adams and Saldi Isra.

One of the Petitioners of petition No. 10/PUU-XVII/2019 Taufiqurrahman Arief said that Article 299 paragraph (1) of the Election Law that reads, “The President and Vice President have the right to conduct campaign,” and Article 448 paragraph (2) letter c that reads, “… survey or polling on the elections,” contradicted the 1945 Constitution.

According to the Petitioners, before the Election Law came into effect, if incumbent presidential and vice presidential candidates participate in the presidential election (Pilpres), they must take a leave of absence even if their protocol rights are still attached to them with limited use of state facilities. Article 6 of Law No. 42 of 2008 on the Election of the President and Vice President stipulates that state officials who run for the election must resign from their positions. However, in the implementation of the 2019 Presidential Election based on the Election Law, such an obligation is not regulated. This, according to the Petitioners, may cause problems in the campaign for incumbents. "Therefore, for justice, it must be regulated so that the President can carry out campaign during holidays," Taufiqurrahman said.

In addition, Taufiqurrahman added, related to Article 448 paragraph (2) letter c of the Election Law, the Petitioners argued that the source of electability survey of the presidential and vice presidential candidates should be explained so as not to cause issues. Therefore, the survey\'s methodology and funding sources of the incumbent candidate pair should be open to the public. "Survey on the electability of presidential and vice presidential candidates in the 2019 presidential election must disclose its funds to the public so that there is no ordered survey," Taufiqurrahman explained.

Based on the argument, the Petitioners requested that the Constitutional Justices declare Article 299 paragraph (1) of the Election Law contrary to the 1945 Constitution and not legally binding insofar as the phrase “The President and Vice President have the right to conduct campaign” not be interpreted as “The President and Vice President have the right to conduct campaign outside of working days for incumbent president and vice president candidates.” Similarly, they requested that Article 448 paragraph (2) letter c not be interpreted “Public participation as referred to in paragraph (1) can be realized in the form of c. Election surveys or polls with the obligation to disclose sources of survey funding.”

Specific Loss 

Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna offered notes for improvement, including on the legal standing, in which the Petitioners had not elaborated clearly their constitutional loss caused by the norms impugned. He did not find causal and factual or potential relationship in that the judicial review of the norms would have prevented violation of the Petitioners’ constitutional rights. This, Justice Palguna said, would be the start of examination of the subject of the petition by the Court. “Therefore, the first point that should be elaborated clearly is the constitutional loss and not only the format of the petition,” he explained.

Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra questioned the specific loss that the Petitioners suffered from any electability survey of presidential and vice presidential candidates. He argued that when a survey agency had not announced its funding sources, there was not any clear injustice that affected the Petitioners.

Constitutional Justice Wahiduddin Adams reminded the Petitioners to pay attention to the procedure for quoting articles for review because they were not always standalone. “Sometimes an article is related to another article. So, really pay attention to the article to be reviewed, which one and what it reads,” he stressed.

Before concluding the hearing, Justice Palguna asked the Petitioners to submit the petition revision by Wednesday, February 20, 2019 at 10.00 WIB at the latest. After submission, the Court’s Registrar Office would schedule the next session. (Sri Pujianti/Syifa Khoirunnisa/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)

---