House and Government Give Statement on Regional Election Case
Image


House Commission III member Anwar Rachman giving statement in the judicial review of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 1 of 2015 on the Declaration of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors, Monday (1/4). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The judicial review of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 1 of 2015 on the Declaration of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors (Regional Election Law) was held by the Constitutional Court on Monday afternoon (1/4/2019). The session had been scheduled to hear the statements from the House of Representatives (DPR) and the Government.

On the case No. 14/PUU-XVII/2019, House Commission III member Anwar Rachman explained that the argument of the Petitioners, who questioned the phrase “the transition to the next election” on the basis of it causing multiple interpretations. The House views that the Petitioners are mistaken in understanding Article 54D paragraph (2) in conjunction with paragraphs (3) and (4) of the Election Law. The phrase "next Election" consists of two words, "election" and "next". The word "Election" starts a capital letter because it is a definition.

“Law Number 10 of 2016 states that the election of governors and vice governors, regents and vice regents, as well as mayors and vice mayors, hereinafter referred to as Election, is the implementation of popular sovereignty in the provinces and districts/municipalities to elect governors and vice governors, regents and vice regents, as well as mayors and vice mayors in a direct and democratic manner," Anwar said.

Meanwhile the word "next" according to the House does not start with a capital letter, as it functions as a supplement or a statement. Therefore, in this case what is meant by "next Election" is the regional election in accordance with Article 1 number 1 of Law Number 10 of 2016 which will be carried out sometime in the future. Thus, the Petitioners’ assumption is not true that the phrase "next election" is confusing because it is clear and unambiguous.

The House also believes that Article 54D paragraph (2) of the Election Law guarantees the constitutional rights of the Petitioners to run again in the next election in accordance with the mechanism determined by legislation. "There is absolutely no element of violation of the Constitution [with regard to multiple interpretations alleged] by the Petitioners," he said.

Article 54D paragraph (5) has mandated the General Elections Commission (KPU) to regulate further provisions on the procedure for selecting candidate pair through the KPU regulations. The a quo Article 54D paragraph (5) reads, "Further provisions regarding the procedure for selecting one candidate pair are regulated in KPU regulations."

Equal Opportunity

The Government representative, Head of Legal Bureau of Home Affairs Ministry R. Gani Muhamad, responded that the phrase "next Election" in the article means that in case the single candidate pair loses against an empty column, a re-election or second round will take place. In accordance with the provision of Article 7 of the Election Law, every citizen has the right to equal opportunity to run for office or be nominated as a candidate for governors and vice governors, regents and vice regents, as well as mayors and vice mayors.

"Thus, the correct interpretation of the phrase "next Election" in Article 54D paragraph (2) means that a re-election will take place for single candidates who lose and with new participants who have fulfilled the requirements and have been verified. The possibility of a losing single candidate against an empty column advancing in the next election shows that lawmakers allow candidate pairs to keep advancing with candidates and representatives who fulfill the requirements and the verification process has been carried out [as if they were] a new candidate pair," Gani Mohammed explained.

Therefore, according to the Government, the next election provides equal opportunities to every citizen as stipulated in Article 7 of Law No. 10/2016. Thus, the single candidate pair who loses against the empty column gets the same opportunity as mandated in Article 54D paragraph (2), which states that if the votes for the candidate pair is fewer than referred to in paragraph (1), the losing candidate pair may run again in the next election.

The Petitioners of case No. 14/PUU-XVII/2019 are Munafri Arifuddin and Andi Rachmatika Dewi Yustitia Iqbal, candidate pair of the 2018 Makassar Mayor and Deputy Mayor Election. They had been declared single candidate pair for said election.

Legal counsel Yusril Ihza Mahendra said that two candidate pairs contested the 2018 Makassar Regional Election. Candidate Pair No. 1 was Munafri Arifuddin and Andi Rachmatika Dewi Yustitia Iqbal, while No. 2 was Moh. Ramdhan Pomanto and Indira Mulyasari Paramastuti Ilham. The Makassar Administrative Court had ruled on March 21, 2018 with decision No. 6/G/Pilkada/2018/PT.TUN.Mks that the qualified candidate pair was only No. 1 (Petitioners). This had been supported by the Cassation Decision of the Supreme Court No. 259 K/TUN/PILKADA/2018 dated April 23, 2018, which declared only Candidate Pair No. 1 (the Petitioners) was eligible.

Responding to the rulings, Yusril added, the General Elections Commission (KPU) passed the Makassar Municipal KPU Decision No. 64/P.KWK/HK.03.01-Kpt/7371/KPU-Kot/IV/2018 on the Declaration of Candidate Pair in the 2018 Makassar Mayor and Deputy Mayor Election on April 27, 2018 and the Plenary Minute No. 435/P.KWK/PL.03.3-BA/7371/KPU-Kot/IV/2018 on the Implementation of the Ruling of the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia regarding the Revocation of the Declaration of Candidate Pair in the 2018 Makassar Mayor and Deputy Mayor Election on April 27, 2018, resulting in the 2018 Makassar Mayor and Deputy Mayor Election only having one contesting candidate pair, that is, the Petitioners vs. Empty Column. (Nano Tresna Arfana/LA/Yuniar Widiastuti)


Tuesday, April 02, 2019 | 16:40 WIB 116