---

The Petitioner attorneys Janser Manurung and Herbert Sihombing during the preliminary hearing of Mandailing Natal re-vote results dispute, Wednesday (19/05) in courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo: PR/Ifa.

JAKARTA, Public Relations - The preliminary hearing of Mandailing Natal (Madina) Regent Election Result Dispute (after the implementation of the re-voting (PSU), was held at the Constitutional Court on Wednesday (19/5/2021). The Petition was submitted by Candidate Pair No. 2 Dahlan Hasan Nasution and Aswin. The hearing for case No. 139/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 was chaired by Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra, accompanied by Constitutional Justices Manahan MP Sitompul and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.

The Petitioner represented by attorney Janter Manurung and Herbert Sihombing conveyed the votes acquired by the candidate pair in PSU at 3 Polling Stations (TPS), namely TPS 001, Bandar Panjang Tuo Village, Muara Sipongi District, TPS 001 and TPS 002 in Kampung Baru Village, North Panyabungan District. This PSU was held based on the Constitutional Court Decision No. 86/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021.

According to the Petitioner' legal team, the results of the final recapitulation at the district level determined by the Respondent for each candidate pair were incorrect and contrary to the provisions of the prevailing laws and regulations. "The vote for Candidate Pair No. 1 was obtained through actions that were contrary to the principles of direct, public, free, confidential, honest and fair (luber jurdil), the principles of democracy and violated human rights in exercising their voting rights," said Janser.

In addition, the Petitioner argued that the Respondent took sides with the Candidate Pair No. 1 which was carried out systematically. Among other things, the Petitioner accused the Respondent of changing the number of Final Voters List (DPT) at 3 TPSs in the PSU with reason for observation, some had passed away, changed addresses, were not known, and so on. The Petitioner questioned any person exercising their voting rights in the PSU, but without a letter of summon to vote.

In respond to that, Constitutional Justice Manahan MP Sitompul questioned the petition whether it was appropriate or not, related to the deadline for the petition as in the hearing, the Petitioner did not explain the deadline for the petition. It was also explained by the Petitioners' attorney that the petition did not pass the deadline stipulated in the Constitutional Court Regulations.

 

Writer: Nano Tresna Arfana.
Editor: Nur R.
Translator: SO

Editor: Indah Apriyanti

Managing Editor: BW

Translation uploaded on 20/05/2021 at 11.44 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.

---