The material judicial review hearing of the Pilkada Law for a case filed by North Halmahera regent Frans Manery and vice regent Muchlis Tapi Tapi, Tuesday (3/22/2022). Photo by Humas MK.

---

Tuesday, March 22, 2022 | 14:21 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) held another material judicial review of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors into Law (Pilkada Law) for a case filed by North Halmahera regent Frans Manery and vice regent Muchlis Tapi Tapi, who argued that Article 201 paragraph (7) of the Pilkada Law goes against Article 28D paragraphs (1) and (3) of the 1945 Constitution. The second hearing for case No. 18/PUU-XX/2022 took place virtually on Tuesday, March 22, 2022. It was presided over by Chief Justice Anwar Usman (panel chair), Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto, and Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra.

One of the Petitioners’ legal counsels, Ramli Antula, conveyed the revisions, including the addition of the provision on the Constitutional Court’s authorities as referred to in the Judiciary Law.

“Next, we have also reinforced the elaboration on legal standing, especially relating the five-year-tenure,” he said.

Before concluding the hearing, Justice Anwar approved the Petitioners’ evidence and informed them that the results of the hearing would be discussed at the justice deliberation meeting (RPH). The litigants were expected to hear news from the Court’s Registrar’s Office.

Also read: Term of Office Reduced, North Halmahera Regent Challenges Provision on 2024 Simultaneous Election

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners argued that they should have been elected for a term of office of five years starting from their inauguration on July 9, 2021. This tenure should end by July 9, 2026, not in 2024 as referred to by Article 201 paragraph (7) of the Pilkada Law. Based on the provision, they would only hold office for 3 years and 5 months.

The Petitioners believe Article 201 paragraph (7) is inconsistent with Article 162 paragraph (2) of the Pilkada Law, leading to overlap of norms regulating term of office. With the annulment or the elimination of the interpretation of Article 201 paragraph (7) of Law No. 10 of 2016 in relation to the term of office of regents and vice regents following Article 162 paragraph (2) of Law No. 10 of 2016 and Article 60 of Law No. 23 of 2014, the potential impairment of the Petitioners’ constitutional rights may be avoided

Writer        : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Andhini S. F.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 3/23/2022 10:19 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.

---