---

Court administrator preparing document of the 2019 DPR-DPRD PHPU hearing of Bengkulu Province on Thursday (18/7) in the Panel Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ganie.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—The Constitutional Court (MK) held a hearing in Panel 2 for the 2019 DPR-DPRD (House of Representatives-Regional Representatives Council-Regional Legislative Council) Election Results Dispute (PHPU) of Bengkulu Province on Thursday (18/07/2019) at 13.30 WIB. The Panel 2 was presided over by Deputy Chief Constitutional Court Justice of the Aswanto, with Constitutional Justices Saldi Isra and Manahan M. P. Sitompul.

The General Election Commission (KPU) as the Respondent gave a response to the petition by the United Development Party (PPP) No. 107-10-08/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019. KPU through attorney M. Ulin Nuha explained that PPP (Petitioner) calculated the vote margin simply by calculating the votes of the Petitioners and the voters in the Final Voters List (DPT) who did not use their voting rights in the Mukomuko DPRD election.

"This is unfounded, because it cannot be ascertained that voters who did not use the right to vote will vote PPP or not. In addition, the Petitioner\'s petition is inconsequential, because there was no objection from the Petitioner’s witnesses in the recapitulation at the sub-district level in Mukomuko City," Ulin said.

Then, the KPU responded to the arguments in the Petitioner\'s report to the Provincial Bawaslu about the administrative violations. The KPU confirmed that Bawaslu had decided that the administrative violations were not proven.

The KPU also responded to the argument of the Golkar Party in the petition No. 181-04-08/PHPU.DPR-DPRD/XVII/2019. Muhammad Rudjito, KPU\'s attorney, responded the Petitioner\'s argumens about the vote inflation and reduction against the Golkar Party (Petitioner).

In the vote count in Suka Makmur Village, Giri Mulya Subdistrict, there was an objection from the PKS witness, because there were differences in the number of votes between the Petitioner’s and the Respondent’s calculations in the vote count recapitulation. "However, at that time it was immediately revised and signed by the witnesses," said Rudjito.

According to Rudjito, in the vote count recapitulation in Giri Mulya Subdistrict, all the vote results data obtained by the witnesses was appropriate. Then, regarding administrative violations argued by the Golkar Party (Petitioner), the KPU has also conducted a vote comparison by opening the ballot boxes and retrieving documents in the ballot boxes to be compared.

"The fact is that from the opening of the ballot boxes and the comparison of documents, there was no difference in the vote acquisition data. However, the Golkar Party representative refused to continue the activity and left the location of the event," explained Rudjito.

Meanwhile, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) as the Relevant Party responded the Golkar Party\'s petition. PDIP explained what was questioned by the Petitioner of the Golkar Party was not a dispute over results, but who won the most votes in Bengkulu Province. (Nano Tresna Arfana/NRA)

Translated by: MJK/YW

---