Tuesday, December 21, 2021 | 12:04 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—Several participants of the National Youth Leadership Education Batch II of 2021 had questions for the Constitutional Court (MK) researcher Alboin Pasaribu during their visit on Friday afternoon, December 17, 2021.

One of them expressed concern over potential partiality of constitutional justices who are nominated by the president. Pasaribu firmly refuted the concern.

“[Two] of the requirements for constitutional justices are fairness and statesmanship. When one is appointed a justice, they must be independent from their nominator. They must be objective and independent, so that they should not be fixated on the institution that nominated them, or any organization that recommended them as a candidate for a constitutional justice,” he said alongside moderator Irwan Indra, an expert staff of the Ministry of Youth and Sports.

Another participant asked what to prepare for litigating in the Constitutional Court, for example in regional election (pilkada) cases. Pasaribu explained that litigants can build a strong team at the beginning to collect any evidence of violations since nomination, campaign, until voting and vote counting.

Then, another asked about the mechanism to litigate in the Constitutional Court. The stages, Pasaribu replied, start with the filing of petition, the preliminary hearing, the petition revision hearing, evidentiary hearing, and the ruling hearing.

“The schedule and stages of litigating in the Constitutional Court are regulated in the Constitutional Court Regulations, which can be downloaded off the Court’s website. The Court even offers [technical assistance programs (bimtek)] or seminar on petition writing and testimony to political parties, [election] candidate pairs, the community, observers of general or regional elections. in addition, the Court has also accepted many invitations from those who required bimtek or similar programs,” he explained.

Constitutional Court’s Authorities

Before the Q&A session, Pasaribu had delivered a presentation on “The Constitutional Court’s Role in Leadership Succession in Indonesia.”

According to Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, the Constitutional Court is authorized to review at the first and final levels, with a final decision, laws against the 1945 Constitution; to decide on authority disputes between state institutions whose authorities are granted by the 1945 Constitution; to decide on the dissolution of political parties; and to decide on disputes over general election results. Meanwhile, pursuant to Article 24C paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution, it is obligated to decide on the House of Representatives’ (DPR) opinion on an alleged violation of law committed by the president and/or vice president. Based on Decision No. 138/PUU-VII/2009, the Court is also authorized to review government regulations in lieu of laws (perppu). It also has an additional authority to rule on pilkada disputes pursuant to Article 157 paragraph (3) of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the election of governors, regents, and mayors.

The Court, Pasaribu explained, also serves as the guardian of the Constitution, the guardian of democracy, the guardian of the state ideology, the protector of human rights, the protector of the citizens’ constitutional rights, and the final interpreter of the Constitution.

Types of Disputes

Pasaribu also explained the types of election disputes. Ethical violations by the election organizers, he said, are resolved by the General Elections Commission (KPU); administrative violations by the Elections Supervisory Body (Bawaslu); implementation disputes by the Election Organizer Ethics Council (DKPP); crimes by the Integrated Law Enforcement (Gakkumdu). Meanwhile, disputes over the results of the elections are resolved by the district court, the State Administrative Court (PTUN), the Supreme Court (MA), and the Constitutional Court (MK).

He also explained the principles in the Court’s procedural law: independence and impartiality; audi et alteram partum (the right to be heard equally); ius curia novit (a court cannot refuse to examine, adjudicate, and rule on a case); active participation by constitutional justices in hearings; public hearing; swift, simple, costless court; and praesumptio iustae causa (presumption of innocence).

The Court’s decisions are final and binding, obtains permanent legal force since it is pronounced at a plenary hearing that is open to public, and are erga omnes—meaning they apply in general, not only to the petitioners.

Pasaribu also revealed the Court’s landmark decisions: No. 011-017/PUU-I/2003 (on the restoration of political rights of former members of the Communist Party of Indonesia/PKI), No. 5/PUU-V/2007 (on independent candidates in pilkada), No. 47-81/PHPU.A-VI/2009 (the noken or community agreement in Papua), No. 102/PUU-VII/2009 (on the use of KTP/ID card in elections), No. 14/PUU-XI/2013 (on simultaneous elections), No. 50/PUU-XII/2014 (on single-round presidential election with only two candidate pairs), No. 100/PUU-XIII/2015 (on single-candidate pilkada), No. 30/PUU-XVI/2018 (on the purification of territorial representations by DPD members), No. 20/PUU-XVII/2019 (on the use of e-KTP certificate in elections), No. 55/PUU-XVII/2019 (alternative models of simultaneous elections), No. 132/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 (on the interpretation of grace period for ex-convicts to run for pilkada), No. 135/PHP.BUP-XIX/2021 (on the citizenship requirement of regional head candidates).

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

Translation uploaded on 12/28/2021 16:01 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.