Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh together with the parties examined the evidence in the third hearing of Labuhanbatu Regent Election Results Dispute No. 58/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 which was held in the Panel II Court Room, the Constitutional Court Building. Tuesday (02/3). Photo: PR/Ilham.
JAKARTA, PUBLIC RELATIONS – The Constitutional Court held the third hearing to examine the petition over the results of the 2020 Labuhanbatu Regent Election. The case No. 58/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 filled by Erik Adtrada Ritonga and Ellya Rosa Siregar (Erik -Ellya) and asked for the annulment of General Election Commission (KPU) Decree No. 176/PL.02.6-Kpt/1210/KPU-Kab/XII/2020 concerning the Certification of Vote Count Results Recapitulation of Labuhanbatu Regent Election, dated December 16, 2020. The hearing was held on Tuesday (02/03/2021) at 08.00 WIB in the Panel II Court Room, presided by Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Aswanto, accompanied by Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh. The hearing was for the testimony from witnesses/experts as well as certification of additional evidence.
The Petitioner represented by their attorneys, Ahmad Rifai Hasibuan and Masmulyadi on the offline hearing, while the principal Petitioner (Erik-Ellya) was present online. Labuhanbatu KPU (Respondent) was attended by their attorney, Mulyadi. Meanwhile, the Relevant Party was attended by their attorneys, Halomoan Panjaitan and Muslim Jaya Butar-Butar. Also presented at the hearing, Bawaslu commissioners of Labuhanbatu Regency, Parulian Silaban and Herdimunte.
The session began with the presentation from witnesses presented by the Petitioner, namely Slamet Riyadi Harahap, Suwandi, and Ahmad Husaini Delimunthe. The Petitioner also presented Maruarar Siahaan as an expert.
Slamet Riyadi is part of District Election Committee (PPK) in North Rantau District and a mandate witness to the Erik-Ellya at KPU. Slamet revealed to the Court that he attended the plenary meeting of the recapitulation in North Rantau on December 11, 2020. He asked the PPK to have a view the data in order to adjust the C1 data he held to the C1 plano, including to match other documents such as Additional Voters List (DPTb) and others.
"I found irregularities in the documents," said Slamet.
According to Slamet, there were many DPTb whose addresses did not match the Polling Station (TPS). "In TPS 17, for example, there is a DPTb whose address is near the TPS 10 area," he continued.
Suwandi, another Petitioner's witness, is the Head of the Environment Office in Terang Bulan District, Labuhanbatu. He told about a meeting at the deputy regent's official residence.
"On September 23, 2020, we were gathered at the deputy regent's official residence. At the location, we met Ustadz Khairul, then there were instructions to support Candidate Pair No. 3. We were sworn to vote for them," said Suwandi.
The meeting was continued on October 29, 2020 attended by Ustadz Khairul and there were directions to win Candidate Pair 3, if Suwandi really wanted to be the Head of the Environment Office again. The witness was also directed to invite residents to vote for Candidate Pair No. 3. When confirmed by the Petitioners' attorneys, the witness stated that there were directions to collect the ID cards of the relevant citizens and shortlisted citizens who could potentially help in winning Candidate Pair No. 3.
Furthermore, Ahmad Husaini Delimunthe gave testimony regarding the things that happened at TPS 03. Ahmad, who is the Supervisor of the Polling Station (PTPS) at the TPS, revealed that on December 9, 2020, at 09.00 WIB, the witness saw Abdul Wahab Nasution coming to TPS 03 where he is no longer domiciled at that particular TPS location for a long time and yet casted his vote there. At 11.30 WIB, the witness saw Abdul Wahab Nasution vote again. As evidence, the witness took photographs of the DPTb list used by Abdul Wahab Nasution, who exercised his voting rights more than once. Furthermore, the incident was reported to KPPS but did not receive any response.
The Petitioner’ Expert
Maruarar Siahaan in his capacity as the Petitioner's expert explained about the structured, systematic and massive (TSM) violation category.
"From what was disclosed in the Petition, as well as the evidence presented where there were KPPS officers given sanctioned, yet it only imposed as the organizer. This is an authentic indicator of TSM violations,” said Maruarar.
This has an impact on all aspects including when it was submitted to the Constitutional Court, as a bad process will produce a bad output too.
"One indicator of TSM violations is that it is carried out cumulatively and spread massively, so it can be an indicator of TSM violations," said Maruarar.
Relevant Party Witnesses
The Relevant Party presented two witnesses, namely Darman Manalu and Nur Azizah. Nur Azizah alleged nonindigenous Labuhanbatu, but the people of Aceh.
"I have had a Labuhanbatu ID since 2019, and I used my ID (carrying the ID Card) when I was voting," said Azizah.
Witness Darman Manalu answered questions raised by the attorney of the Relevant Party. Darman revealed that he and his family received an invitation to vote on December 9, 2020 because he is a resident of the TPS area where he voted.
"I went to the polling station to vote with my wife, Mastari Siagian and my younger brother, Benget Manalu," said Darman.
According to Darman's confession, his wife and younger brother exercised their voting rights for themselves. This contradicts the arguments put forward by the Petitioner regarding the abuse of their rights by other candidate pair.
The Relevant Party’ Expert
The Relevant Party also presented an expert, Indra Prawira. During the hearing session, he answered questions raised by the attorney of the Relevant Party regarding legal matters that are the authority of the Court.
Indra stated, based on Article 24 Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, the authority of the Constitutional Court related to the election cases is to decide disputes over the results of elections. This phrase was chosen with a purpose. The word “result” in “election result” refers to matters of mathematical vote counting. This is prevailed in the Law that the Petitioner is obliged to submit accurate calculation results according to the Petitioner's version.
"Based on expert observations, the petition is unclear. However, the expert sees the Petitioner questioning the occurrence of violations in the election process in which according to the provisions of the Law, the dispute over the election process is the authority of another institution," said Indra.
Hence, according to Indra, it is very important to reveal in the hearing regarding whether the judicial process in other courts has or has not been carried out further. However, in its development, the Constitutional Court did not remain silent and completely discharge of the problems that occurred in the process. Because the Court shall not ignore the rules of procedural justice and override justice. Violation of general principles in elections that are direct, general, free, secret, honest and fair is essentially a form of violation of Article 22 E Paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.
"Therefore, the Constitutional Court strengthens its authority in certain matters and can also accept issues related to process disputes. However, the Court made criteria to differentiate it from other authorities, namely that violations in the process must meet the elements of TSM," he continued.
Statament of Labuhan Batu Bawaslu
Meanwhile, Bawaslu conveyed information regarding the implementation of 2020 Labuhan Batu Regent Election. Bawaslu revealed as many as 24 reports related to alleged violations, and there were 9 findings. Of the 24 reports, 14 were registered, 9 were discontinued, and 9 were unacceptable.
Writer: Siti Rosmalina Nurhayati
Editor: Nur R
Uploader: Nur Budiman
Translator: SO
Editor: R.A. Indah Apriyanti
Managing Editor: Budi Wijayanto
Translation uploaded on 03/03/2021 13.55 WIB
Tuesday, March 02, 2021 | 18:23 WIB 388