---

The legal team of the Democratic Party submitting additional evidence in the 2019 DPR-DPD-DPRD PHPU hearing of West Papua Province, Thursday (11/7) in the Panel 1 Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Mantox.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held the preliminary hearing of the 2019 DPR-DPRD-DPRD (House of Representatives-Regional Representatives Council-Regional Legislative Council) legislative election results dispute (PHPU) of West Papua Province in the Panel I Courtroom of the Constitutional Court on Thursday afternoon (11/7/2019). In the petition No. 63-14-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Democratic Party, attorney Ardy M. claimed there had been data discrepancy in the legislative election results data in several regions in West Papua, including Maybrat, Manokwari, and Tambrauw Regencies.

Ardy explained that the number of voters at 87,226 was higher than that recorded in the final voters list (DPT) at 77,431 in Manokwari Regency, resulting in a difference of 9,835 votes. The party also found vote reduction in Manokwari Regency, which resulted in the vote reduction for the Petitioner. Based on the results of Plenary I meeting on May 9, 2019 at regency level, the Petitioner’s votes reached 2,718, but on May 11, 2019 a recount was carried out in West Manokwari District, leading to reduction in the Petitioner’s votes to 1,686 votes.

“Therefore, in the petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court order the Respondent to return the votes for Candidate No. 1 Imanuel Yenu from the Democratic Party based on the first plenary meeting, with the Petitioner’s vote acquisition at 2,718 votes,” said another attorney Rony Eli before the Court, which was presided over by Chief Justice Anwar Usman, with Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat and Enny Nurbaningsih on the bench.

Purged Votes

In the same hearing, the National Mandate Party (PAN) in case No. 119-12-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 alleged that they had been harmed by the vote results declaration in West Manokwari District of Manokwari Regency. According to the Petitioner, the vote purge reduced his seat in the West Papua Province DPRD. Based on the DC1 confirmed by the KPU, candidate Editha Helena Warikar received 633 votes. The Petitioner alleged that the accurate number should have been 4,207. “Therefore, the Petitioner’s votes purged by the Respondent were 3,574, purged at the district on May 11, 2019,” explained Hasbullah, attorney of West Papua Province PAN.

Hasbullah added that the purged votes that occurred after a change was made to the DA1 on May 11, 2019 could be proven by several witnesses in 28 polling stations (TPS) out of the total 158 all across West Manokwari District. The proof would return 903 votes for the Petitioner at TPS 06, TPS 07, and TPS 48 in West Manokwari District.

Aside from PAN, Golkar also lost votes to the party’s other candidate in the electoral district (Dapil) of West Papua 4, especially in Maybrat Regency. The Petitioner compared the vote acquisition according to the Respondent, in which candidate No. 1 Ortis F. Sagrim obtained 4,305 and candidate No. 4 Alexander Silas Estephanus Dedaida obtained 10 votes.

“The loss of the Petitioner’s votes in Maybrat was because of ballot stuffing for candidate No. 1 and there was vote reduction for candidate No. 4. The reduction occurred in the regency in 24 districts in Maybrat, spread across 267 TPS,” Brodus explained in relation to petition No. 171-04-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019.

Ballot Stuffing

Besides examining DPR-DPRD PHPU, the panel of justices also examined DPD PHPU petitioned by Abdullah Manaray, Petitioner of case No. 05-34/PHPU-DPD/XVII/2019. Attorney Krido Sasmita said the Petitioner alleged vote discrepancy between the KPU (Respondent) and the West Papua DPD candidate M. Sanusi in Maybrat Regency, which consists of several districts, including Aifat, Aitinyo, Ayamaru, Ayamaru Jaya, West Ayamaru, Mare, North Aifat, South Aifat, and South Mare Districts.

The Respondent declared that the votes for M. Sanusi were 1,637 while according to the the Petitioner they must be 29 votes. Therefore, there was a difference of 1,608 votes. The addition, Krido explained, was because the DB1 written by the Respondent did not refer to the DA1 of Aifat District. “So, the accurate votes for the Petitioner were according to the DB1 recapitulation in Maybrat Regency, and if recorded in the Papua Province DC1, the Petitioner would have 1,267 more votes than M. Sanusi,” Krido explained.

Besides the aforementioned petitions, the panel of justices also examined petitions No. 31-08-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), No. 162-02-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Great Movement Party (Gerindra), No. 21-01-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the National Awakening Party (PKB), No. 84-03-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), and No. 95-19-34/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Crescent Star Party (PBB).

In addition, the panel of justices also examined petition No. 227-07-34/ PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Berkarya Party, who was not present until the hearing was over. Before concluding the hearing, Justice Anwar informed that the hearing would continue on Wednesday, July 17, 2019 to hear the Respondent’s response and the statements of the Relevant Party and Bawaslu, as well as to validate evidence. (Sri Pujianti/LA)

Translated by Yuniar Widiastuti

---