Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto and Chief Registrar Muhidin at the material judicial review of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors into Law, Tuesday (5/31/2022). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.

---

Tuesday, May 31, 2022 | 15:37 WIB

JAKARTA, Public Relations—The Constitutional Court (MK) granted the withdrawal request of the material judicial review petition of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 1 of 2015 on the Stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors into Law (Pilkada Law) filed by the association Perkumpulan Maha Bidik Indonesia. The Decree No. 55/PUU-XX/2022 was read out on Tuesday, May 31, 2022 in the plenary courtroom.

Deputy Chief Justice Aswanto stated that, pursuant to Article 34 of the Constitutional Court Law, the Court had held a panel preliminary hearing on May 10, but the day before the Petitioner had sent a letter to request a delay of the hearing. The Court then scheduled it for May 19, which legal counsel Faturohman attended.

“The justice panel had dispensed advice to the Petitioner to revise their petition. However, within the revision deadline the Court gave, the Petitioner sent the Court a letter dated May 20 requesting the withdrawal of the judicial review of Article 71 paragraph (2) of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 1 of 2015 on the Stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors into Law (Case No. 55/PUU-XX/2022),” Justice Aswanto said alongside seven other constitutional justices.

Also read: Petitioner Absent, Court Delays Hearing on Pilkada Law

Regarding the withdrawal, Justice Aswanto asserted that Article 35 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Law reads, “The petitioner may withdraw his/her petition before or during the examination thereof by the Constitutional Court.” He added that paragraph (2) of the article stipulates that withdrawal of a petition means that it cannot be filed again.

The constitutional justices had convened at a justice deliberation meeting on May 23 to decide that the withdrawal request had been legally grounded and, as such, the Petitioner could no re-file the a quo petition. Then, they had ordered the Chief Registrar to record the withdrawal in the electronic constitutional case registration book (e-BRPK) and to return the copy of the petition document to the Petitioner.

Also read: Provision on Regional Head Term of Office Challenged

The legal bureau officer of the association, Faturohman, had said that Article 71 paragraph (2) of the Pilkada Law especially the phrase “shall be prohibited from replacing officials 6 (six) months before the date of stipulation of the candidate pairs” was null and void or not legally binding for governors/vice governors, regents/vice regents, and mayors/vice mayors whose term end in 2022 and 2023, since the pilkada would only take place in 2024. So, the 6-month time before the date of stipulation of the candidate pairs goes against Article 27 paragraph (1) and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

The Petitioner believed that if said phrase in the a quo article was deemed null and void, the six-month period would not be met and, thus, there would be inequality between citizens in law and government, which is against Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, and lead to legal uncertainty and unfair treatment before the law, which is against Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

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

Translation uploaded on 6/2/2022 09:53 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.

---