---

The Petitioner’s attorney M. Maulana Bungaran delivering the subject of the petition of the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections, Thursday (16/7) in the Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations of the Constitutional Court—Chairman of the central executive board (DPP) of the Change Movement Party of Indonesia (Garuda) Ahmad Ridha Sabana and secretary Abdullah Mansuri filed for the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections. The preliminary hearing of case No. 55/PUU-XVIII/2020 took place in the Plenary Courtroom on Thursday, July 16, 2020.

The Garuda party through attorney M. Maulana Bungaran stated that Article 173 paragraph (1) of the Election Law is in violation of Article 28H paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. The article reads, “A Political Party Contesting in an Election is a political party established as an election contestant following a verification process by the KPU.” The Petitioner believes that the re-verification is against the principle of legality, fair legal certainty, and special treatment to receive opportunity and benefit from the previous verification. The Petitioner had contested in the previous election and fulfilled the conditions required in Article 173 paragraph (2) of the Election Law after a long, costly process.

The Petitioner believes it has the right to contest in the election after the Election Law was promulgated in 2019. Bungaran argued before Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto (panel chairman) and Justices Arief Hidayat and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh that the law was made not only for the 2019 Election, but also for the elections following it.

The Garuda party argued that re-verification of contesting parties in every election is against administrative customs in Indonesia, is not regulated in the 1945 Constitution, and doesn’t fulfill the constitutional rights of the contesting parties. “When a political party is declared having passed verification, [that qualification] remains and therefore [it] has the right to contest in the next election without going through re-verification,” Bungaran argued.

Based on the above argument, in its petitum the Garuda party requested that the Constitutional Court declare Article 173 paragraph (1) of the Election Law conditionally constitutional and not legally binding under the interpretation that “The parties that have passed verification for the 2019 Election are re-verified for the following elections.”

Politics Is Dynamic

Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat advised that the Garuda Party strengthen its legal subject, argument on its constitutional damage, and the substance of its petition. He believes that political parties in Indonesia are bound to certain requirements to show that they have significant support from the public. He added that the parties in the diverse Indonesia must be supported by dynamic votes.

“Do parties that are not re-verified still have the dynamic support [of the public]? This is not clearly stated in the petition because [the petition argues] that political parties are static, while [in fact] votes and public support are dynamic. Politics is dynamic and ever-changing, so a verification not necessarily applies in the next election,” he explained.

Meanwhile, Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto said he didn’t find the Petitioner’s argument relating to the constitutional damage convincing. He also observed that the article has been challenged before. He recommended that the Petitioner study petitions lodged in the Court and elaborated on its argument. “The Petitioner must convince the Court of its argument that if the a quo norm [violates constitutional rights] and it’s not an issue of the implementation of the norm,” he added.

Before concluding the session, Justice Aswanto reminded the Petitioner to submit a revised petition no later than Wednesday, July 29, 2020 at 11:30 WIB to the Registrar’s Office. (Sri Pujianti/ASF/NRA)

Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 7/16/2020 11:43 WIB

---