Secretary General of the Constitutional Court M. Guntur Hamzah officially closed the Technical Assistance Program of the 2019 Elections Results Dispute Resolution for the National Mandate Party (PAN) on Wednesday (13/3) at the Pancasila and Constitution Education Center, Cisarua, Bogor. Foto Humas/Hamdi Vigo.
CISARUA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The three-day Technical Assistance Program of the 2019 Elections Results Dispute Resolution for the National Mandate Party (PAN) at the Pancasila and Constitution Education Center, Cisarua, Bogor was officially closed by Secretary General of the Constitutional Court M. Guntur Hamzah on Wednesday evening (13/3/2019).
“This technical assistance builds an excellent network between the Constitutional Court and the National Mandate Party in training human resources, both in the Constitutional Court and the National Mandate Party. However, the Constitutional Court cannot be separated from activities related to political parties,” Guntur said before the Head of the Pancasila and Constitution Education Center Kurniasih Panti Rahayu and PAN Secretary General Surya Imam Wahyudi.
Guntur said, any dispute on the contestation of seats in the House of Representatives, it can be resolved at the Constitutional Court. "Synergy must be built between political parties and the Constitutional Court. That was proven by the technical assistance activities, which lasted three days at the Pancasila and Constitution Education Center," he said.
Guntur added, the Court is always open to collaborating on educational activities, both with political parties and all components of society in relation to education, service, and others. "[With] activities such as technical assistance, at least we have tried to make an effort to [learn about proceedings] at the Court, as [there are] rules and procedural law. Even though a petition has been submitted, when the procedural law is not fulfilled, the results [is obvious]," explained Guntur.
The Constitutional Court has prepared facilities and infrastructure for the litigants—the Petitioner, Respondent, or Relevant Party fellow legislative candidates. For example, the Court facilitates online petitions. The goal is that litigants do not need to rush to submit a petition. "[We provide] 3 x 24 hours to submit a petition. During the 2014 elections, ahead of injury time for petition registration, many people crammed the hall of the Court to submit a petition. Therefore, the Court built an online system [to facilitate petition registration]," Guntur added. In addition, Guntur said that litigants need not call the Court to ask about the progress on the case, as they could access the case tracking application on the Court’s website.
He revealed that the Court has prepared for the 2019 Elections. First, all Court regulations on elections are in place. Second, the Court staff members have been prepared. The Court will prepare 718 personnel to manage the 2019 election disputes. Third, the information and communication technology is prepared. Fourth, the Court has been organizing technical assistance programs on the 2019 election disputes. “All in all, we have prepared various aspects our best,” he asserted.
Role of Political Parties
Several speakers presented at the event. Court researcher Pan Mohamad Faiz affirmed that PAN is one of the parties that contributed to the birth of the Constitutional Court in the Reform era. He then talked about the history of constitutional courts of the world. “One of the global momentums of judicial review is in the United States, of Marbury v. Madison in1803. However, the first constitutional court in the world was not established in the U.S. but in Austria in 1920,” he explained.
The Austrian Constitutional Court, he said, was founded on the idea by law expert Hans Kelsen. Kelsen inspired to create a judiciary that handles political disputes, the constitution, and other sensitive issues. Therefore, the Supreme Court could handle criminal and civil disputes. Although the Czech Constitutional Court claimed to have been formed before the Austrian, “The world does not acknowledge it as the first constitutional court because at that time it was still under the communist regime. In addition, the Czech Constitutional Court had had not implemented its authority, as it had been formed but had not tried cases. Meanwhile, the Austrian Constitutional Court worked right away,” he elaborated.
Faiz explained that the Constitutional Court of Indonesia was founded in 2003, only a year after the amendment of the 1945 Constitution. Although it is quite young, with the rapid development of technology, it has learned a lot and shared its insights with other countries. “For example, in Asia, although the Constitutional Court of Indonesia has been around for only less than two decades, it has been entrusted as President and Permanent Secretariat of the Association of Asian Constitutional Courts and Equivalent Institutions (AACC). Indonesia is one of the leading countries in terms of constitutional and constitutionalism development in Asia along with South Korea and Turkey,” he said while presenting “Constitutional Court within the State.”
Faiz also explained that almost all modern countries in the world have the authority of judicial review. “The difference is only on who [has the authority]. Only a few countries that did not have the authority of judicial review, such as the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and New Zealand. Why? Because they recognize the supremacy of the parliament. It means that legal products cannot be changed. However, after the Reform, Indonesia has had changes. The People’s Consultative Assembly (MPR) used to be the highest state institution, but now it equals other state institutions,” he said.
Junior Registrar III Ida Ria Tambunan delivered the presentation on “The Procedural Law of the 2019 Elections Results Dispute Resolution” while Substitute Registrar Cholidin Nasir presented “The Mechanism, Stages, and Activities of the 2019 Elections Results Dispute Resolution.” Speakers also presented materials on “IT and Communication-Based 2019 DPD Election Results Dispute Resolution” as well as “Techniques of Drafting Petition and Statement of Relevant Party in the 2019 DPD Election Results Dispute Resolution.”
After the presentations, the participants of the technical guidance practiced drafting the Petitioner’s petition and the statement of the Relevant Party in the 2019 DPD Election Results Dispute Resolution and then presenting them. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)
Thursday, March 14, 2019 | 16:26 WIB 146