---

Chief Justice Anwar Usman as the Plenary Chairman accompanied by other Justices read out the ruling for case Number 51/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 concerning 2020 Regional Head Elections Results for Tasikmalaya Regency held virtually in the plenary courtroom on Friday (19/3). Photo by Public Relations/Teguh.

Friday, March 19, 2021 | 21:51 WIB

JAKARTA, PUBLIC RELATIONS—Constitutional Court held the ruling hearing for case Number 51/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 concerning 2020 Regional Head Elections Results Dispute for Tasikmalaya Regency filed by Candidate Pair Number 4 Iwan Saputra and Iip Miptahul Paoz held virtually from the plenary courtroom on Friday morning (19/3). The Court in the Decision stated that the petition was dismissed. 

 “Decision…, in the Petitioner’s pleading, stating that the Petitioner’s petition was dismissed,” stated the Chief Justice Anwar Usman as the Plenary Chairman accompanied by other Justices.

The Court considered the legal standing of the Petitioner concerning the application of Article 158 Paragraph (2) of the Law Number 10 Year 2016 (Regional Head Elections Law). Based on the Population Data Recapitulation Semester I Year 2020 arranged by Directorate General of Population and Civil Registration, Ministry of Home Affairs of the Republic of Indonesia, the total number of population in Tasikmalaya Regency was 1.801.882, therefore, the maximum votes difference between Petitioner and the candidate pair with the most votes was 0,5% of the valid votes based on the final recapitulation declared by KPU of Tasikmalaya Regency. That being said, the maximum votes difference was 0,5% x 959.086 (valid votes) = 4.795 votes. Meanwhile, Petitioner received 308.259 votes and Relevant Party (candidate pair with the most votes) was 315.332 votes. Therefore, the votes difference was 315.332 – 308.259 suara = 7.073 votes (0,73%) or more than 4.795 votes.

 “Petitioner’s Petition could not fulfill the requirements in the Article 158 Paragraph (2) of the Law 10/2016 in regards to the legal standing. Even though Petitioner had a legal standing to submit the a quo petition, quod non, Petitioner’s claims turned out to be not legally grounded,” said the Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto when reading the consideration of the decision.

The Court also responded to Petitioner’s pleading in regards to the involvement of Civil Servants in the election and money politics activites done by Relevant Party, stating that the claims were not supported by legal facts that could convince the Court. Therefore, the claims were legally groundless.

Including some amount of money shared in the neighbourhood as claimed by Petitioner, the Court decided that it was a government program related to COVID-19 handling.

Writer: Nano Tresna Arfana.
Editor: Nur R.
Uploader : Nur Budiman

Translator: WA
Editor (EN): NL
Managing Editor: BW

Translation uploaded on March 20, 2021 at 16:19 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.

---