Imam Muktakin as the KPU\'s attorney delivering statement on Wednesday (17/7) in the Panel 3 Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Teguh.
JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—-The Constitutional Court held a second hearing of the 2019 DPR-DPRD (House of Representatives-Regional Legislative Council) legislative election results dispute (PHPU) on Wednesday (17/7/2019). The KPU as the Respondent, the Relevant Party, and the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) were present to provide a response to the Petitioner’s arguments. The hearing was presided over by Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna, with Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo and Wahiduddin Adams.
Previously, the Crescent Star Party (PBB) in case No. 104-10-03/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 questioned the DPRD seats of the West Sumatra Province, especially the electoral district (dapil) of West Sumatra 2. They claimed to have received 16,920 votes for the seat of West Sumatra Provincial DPRD. However, the Respondent determined the votes for PPP at 16,856.
PPP mentioned the insufficient ballot papers at TPS (polling station) 03 of Kudu Ganting Sub-district had caused 102 people unable to use their right to vote, even though they were registered in the DPT (final voters list). Eight people who could not vote were even election administrators.
The TPS Election Supervisory Committee had provided a recommendation and reported it to the subdistrict election supervisory committee (Panwascam) for a revote there, but the recommendation was not implemented by the Respondent. The Petitioner requested that the Constitutional Court order a revote (PSU) at Kudu Ganting Sub-district TPS 03 and also determine the allocation of seats of the West Sumatra Provincial DPRD based on the results of the revote.
Imam Muktakin as the KPU\'s attorney stated that the Respondent rejected all the arguments submitted by the Petitioner. He said there were no insufficient ballot papers at TPS 03 of Kudu Ginting Village. The Respondent also denied the existence of recommendation of a revote.
"The TPS officers and the chairman of the polling station working committee (KPPS) have signed a statement, stating that they had never signed a statement that they had signed," explained Imam.
Related to the claim of 16,920 votes, said Imam, it was clearly baseless because the Petitioner’s witness did not question the Respondent\'s vote recapitulation, which amounted to 16,856 votes. "So, the accusation of reducing the Petitioner\'s votes does not have a strong reason," he said.
The West Sumatra Bawaslu was represented by Surya Efitremen said that they had investigated on the insufficient ballot papers was accidental. The KPPS Chairman Muhammad Isnaini miscalculated the number of ballot papers for presidential and vice presidential candidates. "Our recommendation is that the reported party is processed by the Padang Pariaman Regency KPU for violating the professional code of ethics," he explained.
Meanwhile, the National Mandate Party (PAN) in case No. 125-12-03/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 questioned the vote acquisition for Dapil Agam Regency 4 of West Sumatra concerning the seat for candidates Rifky Syaiful. PAN claimed to have received 8,914 votes, but the Respondent actually declared the votes at 8,887 votes.
The vote margin occurred because of vote reduction against PAN at various places, such as in TPS 1 and TPS 15 of Baso Subdistrict and TPS 12 of Angke Subdistrict. PPP’s votes at TPS 1 of Baso Sub-district were inflated. Twelve votes for PAN in TPS 19 of Angkek Ampek Sub-district were not acknowledged.
The Respondent\'s attorney Muhammad Alfarisi stated that the Petitioner did not have a legal standing because there was no signature of approval from PAN’s chairman and secretary general, when the Petitioner petitioned for his case as an individual. In addition, the posita and the petitum did not match.
Alfarisi also said that the petition had legal defect because it was registered with a special ballot papers two days after the deadline. "The registration took place on May 23. The power of attorney was registered on May 25," he said.
The attorney of the Relevant Party from the United Development Party (PPP) Akhmad Leksono stated that the Petitioner also did not have a legal standing because it was not in accordance with Article 74 paragraph (2) letter c of the Constitutional Court Law.
Besides the aforementioned cases, the panel of justices also examined case No. 125-12-03/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by Mardison Basir as an individual, case No. 73-03-03/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP), and case No. 51-14-03/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Democratic Party. The justices also examined cases for South Kalimantan Province: case No. 04-08-22/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) and case No. 61-14-22/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 filed by the Democratic Party. (Arif Satriantoro/LA/RD)
Translated by: FS/YW
Wednesday, July 17, 2019 | 17:19 WIB 103