---

Denny Indrayana, attorney of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidate Pair Number 02 Prabowo Subianto and Sandiaga Salahuddin Uno, conveying the subjects of the Petitioner’s petition in the preliminary examination hearing of the 2019 presidential PHPU resolution, Friday (14/6) at the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court held the preliminary hearing of the 2019 presidential election results dispute (PHPU) resolution in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court on Friday morning (14/6/2019). The case No. 01/PHPU-PRES/XVII/2019 was petitioned by Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidate Pair Number 02 Prabowo Subianto and Sandiaga Salahuddin Uno.

Before the Court presided over by Chief Justice Anwar Usman, attorney Bambang Widjojanto conveyed the subjects of the petition, including the formal defect of the requirement of Vice Presidential Candidate Number 01 Ma’ruf Amin, who since the beginning of his candidacy until the preliminary hearing was still a BUMN (SOE) official. In addition, the Petitioner also argued the material defect of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidate Pair Number 01 Joko Widodo and Ma’ruf Amin as the Relevant Party for campaign funds allegedly originating from fictitious sources as well as structured, systematic, and massive (TSM) electoral violations by the Relevant Party in the 2019 presidential election on April 17.

Denny Indrayana explained that the qualitative evidence of TSM electoral violations that his camp submitted in the form of news article links was not just information. He stressed that Article 36 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law could be categorized as letter or written text, reference, or other evidence said, sent, and received or kept electronically.

“For sure, we took the news article links from mass media whose credibility is undoubted. We believe the articles have been checked and rechecked before being [published]. Moreover, most of the links are undisputed facts, whose truth is acknowledged and have evidentiary value,” said Denny, who was present with other attorneys of the Petitioner, such as Luthfi Yazid and Teuku Nasrullah.

Denny then revealed that his camp believed that the 2019 presidential election (pilpres) issue cannot be separated from the electoral principles honest and fair. He added that in the 2019 presidential election, free and fair contest did not occur between participants. The Petitioner was up against incumbent President Joko Widodo, who his camp believed had abused his power and exploited state facilities.

“Misappropriation of state budget and programs is a modus of money politics or vote buying that has directly or indirectly harmed the Candidate Pair Number 02. Therefore, it violated Article 282 of Law No. 7 of 2017 [and] clearly violated the electoral requirement of honesty and fairness as it did not allow for equal competition between the 2019 presidential election contestants,” Denny elaborated.

Petitioner’s Votes

In the next turn, the Petitioner’s attorney Teuku Nasrullah conveyed the alleged quantitative violation that has harmed the Petitioner’s votes in the 2019 presidential election. His camp argued that the General Elections Commission (Respondent) did not heed the recommendation of the Elections Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) in Surabaya and Papua. Stealth polling stations (TPS) were found after confirmation by comparing TPS according to the Respondent’s declaration and the information in the Respondent’s vote count information system (Situng).

Missing C7 Forms 

In addition, Nasrullah explained, his camp also found an indication of manipulation of the special voters list (DPK) and Situng in the vote count and recapitulation. They also found missing C7 forms, which should be used to confirm the voters present in a polling station. He argued that those violations affected the Petitioner’s votes. “The accurate votes according to the Petitioner are 63,573,169 or 48% for Candidate Pair Number 01, and 68,650,239 or 52% for Candidate Pair Number 02,” he said.

Bambang Widjojanto requested to the Constitutional Court through one of the Petitioner’s petita that the KPU Decree No. 987/PL.01.08-KPT/06/V/2019 on the Declaration of the Results of the Election of President and Vice President, Members of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representatives Council, the Provincial Representatives Council, the District/Municipal Representatives Council nationally in the 2019 Elections in relation to the 2019 Presidential and Vice Presidential Election be declared null and invalid.

Substance of Revision

Relevant Party and the Respondent requested clarification on the subject of the Petitioner’s petition read out by the Petitioner in the preliminary hearing, which was mostly included in the petition registered on May 24. In response to the question, Constitutional Justice Suhartoyo explained that, complying with the Constitutional Court Regulation No. 5 of 2018 on the stages of the court proceedings, the petition, the completeness of the petition, and the revision of the petition excluding for presidential PHPU, there is no explanation on the revision of such petition. However, he added, the petition conveyed in the Court must be observed based on the legal basis that the Petitioner alleged to have occurred factually. “So, let the Court review it based on legal arguments that can be accounted for,” he affirmed.

Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna also stated that lawmakers realize that the procedural law of the Constitutional Court cannot rely solely on the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK). “We must understand that the Election Law changes every 5 years. Therefore, aside from Article 55 of PMK No. 4 of 2018, in order to avoid vacuum of procedural law, the Constitutional Court may make adjustments and assessment, including on the petition conveyed in the hearing today,” he explained.

In response to the numerous petita of the Petitioner, the constitutional justices agreed on giving the KPU, Bawaslu, and the Relevant Party more time to prepare a response. After approving the Petitioner’s evidence, Chief Justice Anwar closed the session and stated that the hearing would commence on Tuesday, June 18 at 09:00 WIB to listen to the responses of the Respondent, Bawaslu, and the Relevant Party. (Sri Pujianti/LA/NB/Yuniar Widiastuti)

---