Zenwen Pador, the Petitioner’s counsel, conveying the petition at a hearing for the South Pesisir Regency revote results dispute, Friday (13/8/2021) in the plenary courtroom. Photo by Humas MK/Panji.

---

Friday, August 13, 2021 | 20:54 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing of the 2020 South Pesisir Regency election results dispute on Friday afternoon, August 13, 2021. The petition was filed by Candidate Pair No. 1 Hendrajoni-Hamdanus.

The panel hearing for the case No. 148/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 was presided over by Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (chair), Enny Nurbaningsih, and Manahan M. P. Sitompul. Before the hearing commenced, Justice Arief Hidayat asked which petition that the Petitioners would use. The Petitioners explained that a revised one dated July 28, 2021 would be used in the case. However, Justice Arief said the Court had received a revised one dated July 29, which counsels Oktavianus Rizwa, Muhammad Arif, and Zenwen Pador agreed to use.

Point of the Petition

In the petition, the Petitioners challenged the South Pesisir Regency KPU Decree No. 259/Pt.02.3-Kpt/1381/KPU-Kabupaten/X/2020 on the certification of the candidate pairs in the 2020 South Pesisir Regency election dated September 23, 2020. They questioned the constitutionality, legality, and moral value of several decisions by the regency’s KPU in the election, which they alleged were formally and administratively defective, unconstitutional, lawful, and immoral.

The Petitioners alleged that the South Pesisir Regency KPU had certified Regent Candidate No. 1 Rusma Yul Anwar as a candidate in the election, which he then won. The Petitioners believe that he had not met the administrative requirements because, prior to his run as a regent candidate, he had been convicted by the Padang District Court and the Padang High Court of conducting business without an environmental permit. The two courts ordered that he be detained, although in the end he avoided detention.

When the regent candidates were certified, the Petitioners alleged, Candidate Pair No. 2 was appealing for a cassation in the Supreme Court. The Candidate Pair No. 2 should have met submitted a police certificate (SKCK) to meet an administrative requirement. However, the certificate could not be issued as he was still involved in the aforementioned cases.

“Based on these facts, the implementation of the [regional head election (pilkada)] had far strayed from an honest and fair election,” said counsel Oktavianus Rizwa.

Justices’ Advice

Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih said that the petition had been filed before by the Petitioners with different counsels. She also questioned the wide time gap between the inauguration of Candidate Pair No. 2 and the filing of the petition in July 2021.

“It is as if [the Petitioners] regard this as a new case, when it has been filed before,” she said.

Next, Constitutional Justice Manahan M. P. Sitompul affirmed the point of the petition. The Petitioners asked for an answer regarding the failure of Candidate Pair No. 2 to meet an administrative requirement, which was due to his status as a convict and an issue regarding SKCK.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat asked the Respondent to explain why they certify Candidate Pair No. 2 as a candidate despite not meeting an administrative requirement. He also asked Bawaslu to explain the issue that the Petitioners questioned. Their responses to the case were to be conveyed in a follow-up hearing on August 18, 2021.

Writer        : Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor        : Nur R.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 8/14/2021 19:26 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.

---