Monday, March 29, 2021 | 13:07 WIB
The South Pesisir KPU’s attorney Sudi Prayitno reading out the KPU’s response at a hearing for the 2020 South Pesisir regent election in Panel 3 Courtroom of the Constitutional Court, Monday (29/3/2021). Photo by Humas MK/Teguh.
JAKARTA, Public Relations—The second hearing of the 2020 South Pesisir Regency election dispute was held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Monday morning, March 29, 2021. The petition No. 136/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 was filed by election observers M. Husni, Sutarto Rangkayo Mulie, Nelly Armida (Petitioners I-III). The hearing had been scheduled to hear the response by the South Pesisir General Elections Commission (KPU) as Respondent and the testimony of the South Pesisir Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Body).
The KPU, represented by attorney Sudi Prayitno, stressed that the Court wasn’t authorized to adjudicate and rule on the Petitioners’ petition since it doesn’t concern the certification of the 2020 South Pesisir regent-vice regent election.
“The Petitioners requested the nullification of a decree that the Respondent never passed, because the Respondent passed the certification of the vote counting recapitulation results and the 2020 South Pesisir regent-vice regent election. They also requested the nullification of other decisions that are not the object of the election results dispute. They also requested that the Court act as a positive legislator, which is the authority of the president and the DPR (House),” Sudi said to Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (panel chair), Manahan M. P. Sitompul, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.
The Respondent also believes the Petitioners don’t have legal standing because they weren’t any of the candidate pairs in the regional election that the Respondent certified. In addition, they weren’t listed nor accredited as election observers in the 2020 regional election.
The Respondent also stated that the Petitioners’ petition was three days past the deadline, starting from the moment the voting results were announced by the Respondent. They also claimed that the petition was obscure because it didn’t explain the miscalculation of the vote counting results that the Respondent certified and the correct version according to them.
The Petitioners previously alleged that because the cassation petition by one half of Candidate Pair No. 2 Rusma Yul Anwar based on the Supreme Court register No. 31 K/Pid.SUS-LH/2021 dated February 24, 2021 on an allegation of an environment-related criminal act as well as the decision No. 31 K/Pid.Sus-LH/2021 on Articles 226 in conjunction with Article 257 of the Criminal Procedure Code (KUHAP), Rusma Yul Anwar has been a convict since June 2020.
The Respondent refuted the allegation and deemed it legally groundless. The reason being that when the Respondent certified her as the winning candidate, she was filing a cassation petition to the Supreme Court.
“So, the criminal verdict handed down against Rusma was not yet legally binding and the person concerned hasn’t been assigned the status of a convict as confirmed by the Petitioners,” said Sudi alongside South Pesisir KPU chair Epaldi Bahar.
South Pesisir Regency Bawaslu chair Erman Wadison also testified on the Petitioners’ allegations, regarding which reports had been investigated. Bawaslu received clarification from the Respondent that Rusma Yul Anwar was filing a cassation petition to the Supreme Court. He also stated that Bawaslu didn’t receive any objection from the candidate pairs, including on the recapitulation results, when the elected regent-vice regent was certified.
Writer: Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor: Nur R.
Translator: Yuniar Widiastuti
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.