The second hearing of the 2020 Nabire Regency election results dispute, Monday (30/8/2021) in the courtroom. Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
Monday, August 30, 2021 | 19:03 WIB
JAKARTA, Public Relations—The second hearing of the 2020 Nabire Regency election results dispute (PHP) was held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Monday afternoon, August 30, 2021. The hearing had been scheduled to hear the response from the Respondent as well as the statements from the Relevant Party and the Elections Supervisory Body (Bawaslu) for two cases filed by two candidate pairs. The case No. 149/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 was filed by Candidate Pair No. 3 Fransiscus Xaverius-Tabroni bin M. Cahya, while the case No. 150/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 by Candidate Pair No. 1 Yufinia Mote-Muhammad Darwis.
The General Elections Commission (KPU) RI’s (Respondent) counsel Didi Supriyanto said in response to case No. 149/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 that the Constitutional Court in Decision No. 84/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 on March 19, 2021 had ordered a revote for the 2020 Nabire Regency election. It was a necessary bitter pill for better democracy in the land of Papua, especially Nabire.
“This revote was a stimulus to purifying the democratic process by realizing the honesty and fairness,” Didi said before Constitutional Justices Suhartoyo (chair), Enny Nurbaningsih, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh on the panel.
Also read:Constitutional Court Commands Election Redo in Nabire Regent
Direct Visit to Polling Stations
Therefore, Didi said, all KPU and Bawaslu ranks went to the field to ensure that all available resources be maximized for a direct, public, free, confidential, honest, and fair revote (PSU) as per the mandate of the Constitution, the Election Law, and the KPU regulations. KPU Chairman Ilham Saputra and Commissioner Viryan Azis as well as Bawaslu Chairman Abhan and Commissioner M. Afifudin even paid a direct visit to vulnerable polling stations (TPS) to ensure the smooth process of voting and vote counting pursuant to statutory laws and regulations. On that basis, Didi added, the Nabire Regency Bawaslu Chairman said in the plenary meeting of the revote recapitulation that the 2020 Nabire Regency revote had been the best election under Bawaslu’s supervision.
Didi said despite the Petitioners’ objection to the KPU’s certification of the recapitulation, the KPU had sincerely reviewed the petition on alleged violations—including administrative violations, violations of code of ethics, and electoral crimes. Therefore, the Respondent believes the petition’s subject matter is not the dispute over the certification of the election results, thus the Court does not have the authority to adjudicate, examine, and decide on the Petitioners’ petition.
In addition, the Respondent believes that the Petitioners do not have legal standing in the case, as the margin between their votes and that of the candidate pair with the highest number of votes (Candidate Pair No. 2, Relevant Party) stood at 9,124 (15.3%), which exceeds the threshold as referred to in Article 158 paragraph (2) letter a of the Regional Election (Pilkada) Law. Next, they responded to the Petitioners’ allegation of the Respondent’s failure to revise the Nabire Regency final voters list (DPT); for basing the revote on an invalid, illogical DPT; and for having mistakenly removed 23,574 voters out of the temporary voters list going into the DPT. The Respondent also denied the allegation that potentially eligible voters list had showed the number of voters being 115,877, consisting of voters above 17 years of age who are not TNI members, police officers, or those who have been married.
Also read: Constitutional Court Affirms Nabire Regent Election Redo
Above Threshold
Next, through counsel M. Imam Nasef, the Respondent responded to the allegation by the Petitioners of case No. 150/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021. With regard to legal standing, the vote margin between the Petitioners and the candidate pair with the highest number of votes (Candidate Pair No. 2) was 7,075, which exceeds the threshold. They also asserted that the 2020 Nabire Regency revote had gone smoothly following statutory regulations. It was also carried out directly and under the supervision of the KPU and Bawaslu.
The Respondent also responded to the Petitioners’ allegation of ineligible voters who were not listed in the DPT. They believe the Petitioners’ assumption was contrary to the Constitutional Court Decision No. 84/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021. Because the verdict of the a quo decision on the revote differed from that for other regions, where the KPU was prohibited from updating the DPT. In Nabire Regency, in order to implement the Court’s decision, the KPU as Respondent in fact had to revise the DPT by updating it.
Relevant Party’s Refutation
Meanwhile, the Relevant Party through counsels Rojikin and colleagues responded to the allegations of the Petitioners of case No. 149/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021. They believe the Court does not have the authority to adjudicate on the case because the subject matter concerns violations in relation to the invalid, illogical DPT. The Relevant Party believes this is cannot be a reason to adjudicate and hear the a quo case. They also refuted all allegations made by the Petitioners and requested that the Court reject all of the Petitioners’ arguments.
They then refuted the petition No. 150/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021. They believe the Court does not have the authority to adjudicate, examine, and decide on the case. The petition’s object is the Respondent’s decision on the significant vote acquisition, pursuant to the Constitutional Court Regulation No. 6 of 020 and other regulations. However, they said, in the petition, the Petitioners did not show the Respondent’s incorrect vote counting results or the correct results. They then refuted all of the Petitioners’ arguments.
Bawaslu’s Response
Next, a member of the Papua Provincial Bawaslu, Ronald Manoach, responded to the case No. 149/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021. “After the Constitutional Court’s Decision No. 84, the Papua Provincial Bawaslu supervised the DPT revision five times. Bawaslu RI and the provincial Bawaslu supervised the [temporary voters list (DPS)] one time. Then [they] supervised the revote,” he said.
Meanwhile, in response to the arguments in the case No. 150/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021, the Nabire Regency Bawaslu through their member Adriana Sahempa said that they had supervised and made an effort to prevent violations through appeals and recommendations to the Respondent and other institutions with regard to the updates on the voters data, from the DPS to the DPT.
Also read: Petitioners of Nabire Election Dispute Say KPU Failed to Revise DPT
At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners of case No. 149/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 alleged that the revote counting had not followed the Constitutional Court Decision No. 84/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021, in which the Court ordered a direct revote based on a revised final voters list (DPT). They believe the Respondent’s mistake began with their failure to revise the Nabire Regency DPT, basing [the revote] on an invalid, illogical DPT. The Respondent had mistakenly removed 23,574 voters out of the temporary voters list going into the final voters list (DPT).
Meanwhile, the Petitioners of case No. 150/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 alleged that the revote (PSU) had violated statutory laws. They conveyed arguments of three violations in the Nabire revote. The first fundamental violation was the fact that the Respondent allowed voters to cast their votes using e-KTP (e-ID), leading to a rise of voters in the DPT. Second, double voting at the same or different polling stations (TPS) by voters in the DPT by using e-KTP. Third, violations by the Respondent and other election organizers at various polling stations, for example polling committee (PPS) chairperson asking polling station working committee (KPPS) chairperson to give away remaining ballots to a certain candidate pair.
At the end of the hearing, the justice panel requested that the litigants wait for the developments of the case after they conveyed in a justice deliberation meeting (RPH).
Writer : Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR : M. Halim
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 8/31/2021 09:41 WIB
Disclaimer: The original version of the news is in Indonesian. In case of any differences between the English and the Indonesian versions, the Indonesian version will prevail.
Monday, August 30, 2021 | 19:03 WIB 283