Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto at the ruling hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections, Tuesday (3/29/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Tuesday, March 29, 2022 | 15:35 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) could not grant the judicial review petition of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law) filed by the Ummah Party. The Decision No. 11/PUU-XX/2022 was read out at a ruling hearing on Tuesday, February 29, 2022 in the plenary courtroom. The Petitioner was represented by Chairman Ridho Rahmadi and the Secretary-General of the party’s DPP (central executive board) A. Muhajir.

In its legal considerations read out by Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto, the Court asserted that it had observed its Decision No. 74/PUUVIII/2020 dated January 14, 2021 regarding the legal standing of political parties in filing a petition on presidential threshold in casu Article 222 of Law No. 7 of 2017.

“Based on the Court’s considerations in the abovementioned Decision No. 74/PUUVIII/2020, political parties that have legal standing to file a petition of Article 222 of Law No. 7 of 2017 are political parties or coalition thereof who have contested in the previous election,” he explained.

Also read: Presidential Endorsement Hindered, Ummah Party Challenges Presidential Threshold

However, the Petitioner is newly-registered with the Ministry of Law and Human Rights and has never been verified by the KPU (General Elections Commission) both administratively and factually, as is required of political parties contesting in elections.

“The a quo party cannot be declared a participant of the previous election, thus there is no constitutional impairment in the part of the Petitioner in the a quo petition,” Justice Aswanto stressed.

“Based on the aforementioned legal considerations, the Court believes that the Petitioner did not have legal standing to file the a quo petition. Although the Court is authorized to adjudicate the a quo petition, since the Petitioner did not have legal standing to file the a quo petition, the Court did not consider the merit of the petition,” he said.

Also read: Ummah Party Revises Petition Challenging Presidential Threshold

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner argued that Article 222 of the Election Law is not an open legal policy and is in violation of Article 6 paragraph (2) and Article 6A paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution. According to the Petitioners, Article 6A paragraph (5) of the 1945 Constitution concerns technical matters, while the 20% presidential threshold does not concern technical matters and actually hinders fair and competitive democracy. Meanwhile, endorsement should have been regulated in a limited manner in Article 6 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. Therefore, Article 222 of the Election Law is actually a closed legal policy and, thus, should be annulled. Thus, in their petition, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare Article 222 of the Election Law unconstitutional and not legally binding.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ya2Vfcr6gbs

Writer        : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : Raisa Ayuditha
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 4/5/2022 07:46 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.

---