Petitioner Herifuddin Daulay attending the preliminary hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections virtually, Tuesday (10/5/2021). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Tuesday, October 5, 2021 | 18:12 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held a judicial review hearing of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections on Tuesday, October 5, 2021. The petition No. 50/PUU-XIX/2021 was filed by contract SMK (vocational school) teacher Herifuddin Daulay from Dumai, who challenges Article 227 and 229 of the Election Law against Article 27 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. The hearing was provided over by Constitutional Justices Saldi Isra (chair), Arief Hidayat, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh in the panel hearing. The Petitioner appeared before the Court virtually.

Appearing without a legal counsel, the Petitioner revealed his background in filing the petition: Indonesia and the national life has experienced various governments—ancient kingdoms, colonization, the struggle for independence, and the reformation. The Preamble to the 1945 Constitution states that the main goal of the struggle for independence is to be its on sovereign, including having a Indonesian citizen (WNI) as president. “This is the main issue in the state life in the [NKRI (Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia)] as the shelter for the Indonesian nation. It cannot be denied that the founding of the NKRI was thanks to the Indonesian people, native Indonesians, Indonesian citizens on the entire land of Indonesia,” he said.

The Petitioner believes that Law No. 7 of 2017 that is in force to elect president-vice president has not reflected the basic provisions of the 1945 Constitution and has fatal mistakes that conflict with the 1945 Constitution as they could allow Indonesia to be ruled by other nations through an Indonesian citizen.

Justices’ Advice

Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat offered several recommendations for the petition. He advised that the Petitioner read the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2021, which details the format of the petition, and study samples of good petitions on the Court’s website so that the petition follows the Court’s procedural law.

“The petition has not followed the standard format, so it needs improvement. Revise the format and list the evidence on a separate document so that the petition only consists of the Petitioner’s profile, the Court’s authority, as well as the Petitioner’s legal standing that explains the subject and the constitutional loss due to the enactment of the article and the reason why it conflicts with the 1945 Constitution,” he said.

Next, Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh advised that the Petitioner elaborate his constitutional loss so that the conflict between the a quo law and the 1945 Constitution will be obvious. The Petitioner is also expected to read Constitutional Court decisions on the judicial review of the same article.

Meanwhile, Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra requested that the Petitioner explain his loss should the president elect was not a native Indonesian. “If the Petitioner cannot explain the loss due to the enactment of the law and why the petition was filed, the [Petitioner] could be deemed lacking legal standing and the petition could not advance as there is no factual loss on the Petitioner’s part due to the enactment of the norm petitioned for review,” he stressed.

Writer        : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : M. Halim
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 10/6/2021 09:42 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.

---