---

Denny Indrayana (principal) attended the remote preliminary hearing of the regent election results dispute.

JAKARTA, HUMAS MKRI - The preliminary hearing of the 2020 Regent Election (pilgub) results dispute for South Kalimantan (Kalsel) was held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Tuesday (26/1/2021) morning at 08.00 WIB. The petition for the election case filed by Candidate Pair (Paslon) No. 2 Denny Indrayana and Difriadi (Denny-Difri). The trial of the case Number 124/PHP.GUB-XIX/2021 was carried out by the panel of Constitutional Justice Aswanto (panel chair), as well as Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.

A number of arguments were conveyed by Denny-Difri in the hybrid trials with fairly strict health protocols in order to prevent the spread of Covid-16. Denny-Difri objected to the South Kalimantan KPU decision Number 134/PL.02.6-Kpt/63/Prov/XII/2020 concerning the certification of vote count recapitulation of the 2020 regent election as per 18th of December which certified Candidate Pair No.1 Sahbirin Noor and Muhidin (Sahbirin-Muhidin) as the winner.

"The Petitioner is questioning the 100 percent attendance rate at several polling stations in the midst of declining public participation in the election. In addition, there is evidence of fraud in which polling station working committee (KPPS) casts the ballot for Candidate No. 1 first, "said the Petitioner's attorney, T.M. Luthfi Yazid accompanied by another attorney Muhammad Raziv Barokah.

Denny-Difri through their attorneys also revealed the misuse of social grants that were used as a campaign tool for the incumbent Governor of South Kalimantan Shabirin Noor, such as funds for water reservoirs to wash hands regarding Covid-19 which was spread throughout districts in South Kalimantan Province with stickers affixed self-image in the form of a picture and name of “Paman Birin” with the campaign tagline “Moving”.

In addition, based on the Minutes and Certificate of Vote Count Recapitulation from each regency at the Provincial Level Number 163/PL/02/6-BA.63/PROV/XII/2020, the number of valid votes was asmuch as 1,659,517, which means 1.5% of the total is 25,432 votes. Meanwhile, Sahbirin-Muhidin won 851,822 votes and Denny-Difri with 843,695 votes so that the difference between the two was 8,127 (0.4%).

"Therefore, the Petitioners opined that the difference in votes between Candidate Pair No. 1 and the Petitioner meets the threshold requirements for submission as in the Pilkada Law," explained Luthfi Yazid.

Furthermore, the Petitioners stated that the implementation of the election had several principles violation which were emphasized in Article 22E Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, namely "direct, public, free, honest and fair’ (luber jurdil). Therefore, according to the Denny-Difri, the Sahbirin-Muhidin should have been cancelled from their candidacy. Denny-Difri argued that in the implementation of the election there were fraud, threats and intimidation in several areas in South Kalimantan such as in Binuang District, Tapun Regency, Hatungun District, Banjar Regency, Barito Kuala Regency, as well as fraud and violations that led to additional vote for the Sahbirin-Muhidin in South Banjarmasin District.

Meanwhile Denny Indrayana, who was present online stated, "We apologize for not being able to come directly to MK because it coincided with the emergency response to the flood that hit South Kalimantan. We decided to be present online, "said Denny. Furthermore, he explained in his understanding that trial was a preliminary examination related to correcting typos and so on as well as non-substantial revision so that his party decided to remain in South Kalimantan.

"Actually, our chance to submit petitions at the next trial. We want to convey the main petition at the next trial as a form of accountability to the voters in South Kalimantan, "said Denny to the Panel of Justices.

Aswanto stated, "The Constitutional Court Regulations clearly stated concerning the opportunity for the Petitioner to explain the main points of the petition. Regarding the revision, the Regulation states that there is only one time for the revision. Even if there are revisons in the courtroom, it should be minor in nature. That is already clear in our norms”.

Two Candidates Pair Questioning the Banjar Pilkada

The panel also held the preliminary hearing for the 2020 Banjar mayoral election case. The trial for case Number 121/PHP.BUP- XIX/2021 filed by Candidate Pair No. 3 Rusli and M. Fadhlan (Rusli-Fadhlan).

Rusli-Fadhlan argued that Candidate Pair No. 1 Saidi Mansyur and Said Idrus who were certified as the winner of the regional election by KPU Banjar had committed various structured, systematic, and massive (TSM) violations before, during, and after the election day. Then, there were partiality of civil servants (ASN), village officials, and election organizers. There were also additional final voters list (DPTb) which extraordinary and spread across all sub-district in Banjar Regency and a massive increase in voter’s participation at several polling stations. With these reasons, the Petitioner asked to cancel the certification, or else, KPU shall conduct a comprehensive re-vote in Banjar Regency.

The Petitioner also argued that the application of Article 158 Paragraph (2) of Law No. 10/2016 which limits the applicants right to submit a PHP regional election application and proves the existence of TSM fraud to MK actually reduces the meaning of democracy itself without paying attention to the aspects of justice that are in accordance with the principles of “luber jurdil” as mandate in the Pilkada Law is a rule of law and has provided a negative impact in the form of protection for candidates who commit fraudulent acts and/or protect election organizers and/or pairs of candidates who have acted fraudulently. However, their fraudulent acts will never be revealed if the Petitioner is not given the opportunity to prove in the PHPKada trial at the Constitutional Court because the limitation of Article 158 Paragraph (2) of Law No. 10/2016.

Furthermore, regarding the vote acquisition in the Banjar regional election, the Petitioner won 112,004 votes. Meanwhile, Saidi Mansyur and Said Idrus as the winner won 141,619 votes. As for Candidate Pair No. 3 Andin Sofyanoor and Muhammad Syarif Busthomi received 37,517 votes, who also as Petitioner in the case Number 123/PHP.BUP-XIX/20. This Petitioner argued that in the District of Kontak Makmur there were 11 polling stations (TPS) collected ballots in four villages without an official report which were then used for voters who were not registered in the final voters list (DPT) in Madurejo Village.

In addition, Andin Sofyanoor and Muhammad Syarif Busthomi argued that at TPS 17, Keraton Village, no form C plano was found, and it turned out that the form was kept by the Chairman of the KPPS in a damaged condition. They argued that at TPS 01 Tambak Baru Village, the ballot boxes were not sealed and at TPS 01 Tanjungrema Darat Village there were 2 voters with E-KTP who did not sign their signatures, and at TPS 19 Tanjungrema Darat Village there were 2 voters who only used family cards. Next, at TPS 13 and TPS 14 in Bineau Village, there were 4 voters who did not use their E-KTP and certificate.

Moreover, the Petitioners argued that the sub-district election committee (PPK) East Martapura had an excess number of ballots outside the provisions. It is noticed according to the explanation by the Head of PPK and the Head of the Banjar Regency KPU at the time of recapitulation of the vote count in Banjarbaru City on 14th-17th of December, 2020.

Writer: Fuad Subhan/Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor: Nur R.
Uploader: Nur Budiman
Translator: SO (Editor: R.A. Indah Apriyanti)

Translation uploaded on 01/26/2021 at 19.44 WIB

Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian version, the Indonesian version will prevail.

---