---

Evi Apita Maya as the Relevant Party in the legislative election results dispute (PHPU) hearing of West Nusa Tenggara DPD candidates on Thursday (18/7) 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) of the West Nusa Tenggara DPD candidates on Thursday (18/7). The General Election Commission (KPU) as the Respondent, at this session responded the argument of the Petitioners who questioned the manipulated photo on the ballot papers for the Regional Representative Council (DPD) candidates.

The hearing was held in the Panel 3 Courtroom on the 4th floor of the Constitutional Court building. The panel of constitutional justices examining this petition was led by Constitutional Justice I Dewa Gede Palguna with two panel members, Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo and Wahiduddin Adams.

Previously, DPD candidate of West Nusa Tenggara Province (NTB) Farouq Muhammad in the case No. 03-18/PHPU-DPD/XVII/2019 questioned photo of DPD candidate Evi Apita Maya. Farouq argued that Evi\'s photo on ballot paper had been heavily edited.

“Evi’s action has influenced the public to choose her during the voting, when Evi allegedly did not campaign in remote areas optimally," said the Petitioner. Due to this action, Evi was elected to become a DPD member with the most votes at 283.932 votes. The Petitioner accused that Evi had violated Article 65 paragraph (1) letter (j) of the General Elections Commission (KPU) Regulation No. 30 of 2018. The provision in the article regulates the use of old photos of more than 6 months.

In addition, the Petitioner also questioned the photo of another rival, Lalu Suhaimi Ismy. The Petitioner said that Suhaimi used the same old photo he had used when running in 2014-2019 DPD election, which also violates Article 65 paragraph (1) letter (j) on KPU Regulation No. 30 of 2018.

The Petitioner also alleged that the KPU had taken the wrong act by determining that they both qualified to be DPD candidates. Therefore, the Petitioner requested that the KPU Decree on the Declaration of the Results of the General Elections regarding the determination of the permanent list of DPD members for individuals by the name of Evi Apita Maya and Lalu Suhaimi Ismy be annulled.

Responding to the argument, the KPU (Respondent) through attorney Rio Rachmat Effendi said that the Court should reject the Petitioner\'s petition because the subject of petition submitted by the Petitioner in the petitum to disqualify the two DPD candidates was not the authority of the Constitutional Court.

"The Constitutional Court heard dispute on votes in the elections while administrative violations are within the authority of the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu),” he said firmly.

He said, The Petitioner only argued administrative violations, election violations, and inflated votes without illustrating them in detail. This further strengthened the reason why the Court must reject this petition.

Rio also stated that the Petitioner\'s Petition was not in accordance with the Constitutional Court Regulation Number 3 of 2018 concerning Procedures in the Election Results Dispute of Members of the Regional Representative Council (DPD). Tthe Petitioner\'s petition was not signed by his attorney.

Evi Apita Maya as the Relevant Party through her attorney D.A Malik said the petition was unclear (obscuur libel) because the Petitioner did not expressly state the results of the Respondent\'s vote count to be presented in the petition. There were also inconsistencies in the posita and petitum arguments in this petition.

Malik referred to Article 182 of Law Number 7 of 2017 on General Elections. In the 18 conditions for nominating the DPD, there were no rules regarding photographs.

"Before going to print, there was an administrative verification process related to ballot papers. All DPD candidates were asked to check and if agreed then signed it. Why is it an issue only now?" he explained.

Panel 3 also held a PHPU hearing of a case petitioned by the National Democratic Party (NasDem) No. 191-05-18/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019. In their petition, NasDem questioned the party\'s votes in Bima Regency. This is related to the allocation of the DPRD seats for the Bima Regency electoral district (dapil) 6 . The Nasdem Party claimed to have received 8,648 votes but the Respondent declared it at 8,645 votes. Meanwhile the People\'s Conscience Party’s (Hanura) votes increased from 2,876 votes to 2,914 votes.

Responding to this, the attorney of the KPU (Respondent) Dipo Lukmanul Akbar stated that the Petitioner\'s petition was unclear regarding the accusation on inflated votes.

"The Petitioner had misread the C1 forms and DAA1 forms. The Petitioner also did not know whether the forms had correct data or if it was only a mistake in data recording. If the data was recorded incorrectly, has it been corrected during the recapitulation of polling committee (PPS) and Subdistrict Election Committee (PPK) levels?" he explained. On this basis, he said, the Relevant Party requested that the Constitutional Court reject the petition entirely.

Today\'s hearing was also heard other PHPU cases from West Nusa Tenggara (NTB) Province: case No. 179-04-18/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 submitted by the Golongan Karya Party (Golkar) and No. 56-14-18/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019 submitted by the Democratic Party. (Arif Satriantoro/NRA/RD)

Translated by: FS/YW

---