Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat, Enny Nurbaningsih, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh discussing fake signatures on the material judicial review petition of Law No. 2022 on the State Capital, Wednesday (7/13/2021). Photo by Humas MK/Ifa.
Wednesday, July 13, 2022 | 20:43 WIB
JAKARTA, Public Relations—Another hearing for the material judicial review of the provisions on the appointment of the head of the State Capital (IKN) authority in Law No. 3 of 2022 on the State Capital (IKN Law) was held by the Constitutional Court (MK). The second hearing for case No. 66/PUU-XX/2022 on Wednesday, July 13, 2022 should have been to examine the revisions to the petition but the justice panel—Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (panel chair), Enny Nurbaningsih, and Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh—found irregularities with regard to the Petitioners’ signatures.
“There are a few things that require confirmation. Are these signatures really your own or are they fake? They are suspicious, do not seem to be the Petitioners’ real signatures,” Justice Arief said to the Petitioners, who appeared before the Court virtually.
At first, the Petitioners said that the signatures were their own and even insisted that they were digitized. However, seeing that the Petitioners seemed to have hidden something, Justice Arief emphasized that he would process the signatures with the police if proven they were fake.
“Let’s see on Dea Karisna’s KTP [(resident identity card)]. The signatures on the KTP and on the petition are different. Where is Dea Karisna? Then, Nanda Trisua’s are also different. Don’t play games. Rafi’s are also different. Ackas’ are very different, also Hurriyah’s. This can be reported to the police, criminalized, [if you are] playing games with an official institution. The [signatures on] the KTP and the petition are all different,” Justice Arief stressed.
Admitting Fake Signatures
One of the Petitioners, Hurriyah Ainaa Mardiyah, revealed that out of six petitioners, two of them did not sign the revised petition. She then apologized to the justice panel.
“Your Honors, if I could offer an answer, I apologize in advance because not all signatures are the same as those on the KTP. The signatures of Dea Karisna and Nanda Trisua [were actually faked] with the agreement of the parties concerned because they were not with us when we revised the petition,” she explained.
Also read: Provision on Appointment of Head of IKN Authority Challenged
Petition Withdrawn
After some reconsideration, the justice panel gave the Petitioners the option to withdraw the petition. “If you would like to file the petition again, please do so with real signatures, otherwise we would process this with the police. So, what would you like to do? As law students, you must understand that you’re dealing with a state institution. The Constitutional Court is a state institution. Faking signatures is intolerable. It should not be done by law students, as it is a violation of the law. [The justice panel] agreed that you [should] withdraw [the petition]. If you’d like to re-file it, you may,” Justice Arief stressed.
The Petitioners asserted that they were ready to withdraw the petition. The justice panel then requested that they withdraw it officially before the Court and to submit an official letter to request it.
“Alright, Your Honors. We apologized for our mistake and negligence. We would like to withdraw our petition for case No. 66/PUU-XX/2022 on Wednesday, July 13, 2022,” stressed Hurriyah as the Petitioners’ spokesperson.
At the preliminary hearing on June 27, Petitioners I-VI—M. Yuhiqqul Haqqa Gunadi, Hurriyah Ainaa Mardiyah, Ackas Depry Aryando, Rafi Muhammad, Dea Karisna, and Nanda Trisua Hardianto—all aw students of University of Bandar Lampung, challenged phrases and words in Article 5 paragraph (4), Article 9 paragraph (1), and Article 13 paragraph (1) of the IKN Law. They alleged that those articles have harmed democracy and do not respect the reform as part of the nation’s history, causing real harm to them in particular and the Indonesian people in general, who basically have political rights, the right to participate in government, and the right to vote/be elected.
They asserted that the administration of government requires the public participation in policy-making and the election of people’s representatives and regional heads in a direct, public, free, confidential, honest, and fair manner. The principle of democracy guarantees that all citizens have equal rights in making decisions for the survival of citizens.
The Petitioners argued that the community or citizens must be able to freely choose their own representatives and regional heads who will lead them and participate actively either directly or through representative institutions in making government policies. Article 9 paragraph (1) of the IKN Law, they asserted, kills the democratic principle for the people to participate directly in electing their own regional heads, thus contradicting Article 18 paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution. For this reason, in their petitum, the Petitioners requested that the Court annul those articles and declare them unconstitutional.
Writer : Nano Tresna A.
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR : Andhini S. F.
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
Translation uploaded on 7/14/2022 08:50 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.
Wednesday, July 13, 2022 | 20:43 WIB 258