---

The Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Aswanto, read out the Court decision in the ruling hearing of Banjarmasin Regional Head Election Result Dispute which took place online, Thursday (27/05/2021). Photo: PR/Ilham.

JAKARTA, PUBLIC RELATIONS - The Petition of Banjarmasin Mayor Election Result Dispute regarding the Re-Voting (PSU) filled by Candidate Pair No. 4 Ananda and Mushaffa Zakir declared unaccepted by the Constitutional Court (MK) at last. This was conveyed by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Anwar Usman accompanied by other Constitutional Justices at the ruling hearing, Thursday (27/5/2021) afternoon.

“[The Court] stated that the Petitioner’s Petition is unacceptable,” said Anwar Usman regarding the Decision No. 144/PHP.KOT-XIX/2021.

At the hearing, the Court also declared the decision of Banjarmasin General Election Commission (KPU) No. 47/PL.02.6-Kpt/6371/ KPU-Kot/V/2021 concerning the Stipulation of Vote Count Results Recapitulation on Post-Constitutional Court Decision No. 21/PHP.KOT-XIX/2021 in the 2020 Banjarmasin Mayor Election dated May 2, 2021 was valid. Furthermore, the Court ordered the Respondent to settled the Elected Candidate Pair.

In its legal consideration, the Court stated that the Petitioner' arguments were not legally grounded. The arguments were regarding the existence of un-neutrality and abuse of authority of the organizers, abuse of power of the Relevant Party in the distribution of food staple assistance (BST), also the efforts to direct citizens by promising a certain amount of money or other material which was carried out by means of structured, systematic, and massive manner (TSM).

Furthermore, the Court considered the Petitioner's legal standing. Article 158 paragraph (2) letter C Law No. 10/2016, stated that districts/cities with a population of more than 500,000 (five hundred thousand) up to 1,000,000 (one million) people, filing disputes over vote acquisition is made if there is a maximum difference of 1% (one percent) of total valid final votes results on KPU Regency/Municipal. Whereas based on the recapitulation of population data for Semester I of 2020, the total population in Banjarmasin City is 671,383 people, so that the difference in vote acquisition between the Petitioner and the winning Candidate Pair was at most 1% of the total valid votes from the final stage vote count determined by Banjarmasin KPU.

The  differences in the acquisition of votes between the Petitioner and the winning candidate pair was 1% x 235,441 votes (total valid votes) = 2,354 votes. Whereas the Petitioners' vote acquisition was 81,262 votes, while the votes acquired by the RelevantParty (pairs of candidates winning the most votes) were 89,378 votes, so that the difference in vote acquisition between the Petitioner and the Relevant Party was (89,378 votes - 81,262 votes) = 8,116 votes (3.45%) or more than 2,354 votes.

Based on the legal consideration above, the Court opined that even though the Petitioner was a Candidate Pair for Banjarmasin Mayor Election, they did not fulfill the provisions for filing the a quo petition. Therefore, the Respondent's and the Relevant Party's exception that the Petitioner had no legal standing was legally grounded.

Previously, the Petitioner represented by attorney Bambang Widjajanto conveyed the votes acquired on April 28, 2021 in three sub-districts namely Mantuil, Murung Raya, and South Basirih. At the PSU, Candidate Pair No. 1 received 427 votes, Candidate Pair No. 2 acquired 4,992 votes, Candidate Pair No. 3 received 582 votes, while Candidate Pair No. 4 won 11,637 votes.

However, if combined the Petitioner' victory in three sub-districts with all sub-districts in the City of Banjarmasin, the Petitioner still lost in terms of votes from Candidate Pair No. 2 Ibnu Sina and Arifin Noor as incumbent. Even though the Petitioner received the most votes in the PSU, there were irrefutable facts in the form of evidence and witnesses that clearly explain the violation of the on the Court Decision Dictum and violation of the KPU Decision.

According to the Petitioner, there had been a series of very sophisticated frauds committed by the Respondent and the incumbent who had abused their authority and influence. The series of fraud and abuse of authority were repeatedly and increasingly sophisticated by the Respondent and the incumbent, which seriously harmed the interests of the Petitioner.

 

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

Editor: NL

Managing Editor: BW

Translation uploaded on 28/05/2021 at 12.01 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.

---