---

Tuesday, September 13, 2022 | 15:59 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI)—The petition revision hearing of the material judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law) was held at the Constitutional Court (MK) on Tuesday, September 13, 2022. The case No. 78/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by the Labor Party.

Attorney Muhammad Imam Nasef conveyed the revision on the Court’s authority. He then conveyed the articles being petitioned: Article 173 paragraph (1), Article 177 letter f, Article 75 paragraph (4), Article 145 paragraph (4), and Article 161 paragraph (2) of the Election Law.

“The Petitioner suffered from constitutional impairment, at least would potentially do so, due to the enactment of Article 173 paragraph (1) of the Election Law as interpreted by the Constitutional Court in Decision (No. 55/PUU-XVIII/2020) dated May 4, 2001, Article 177 letter f of the Election Law along the phrase ‘citizens in each regency/city,’ as well as Article 75 paragraph (4), Article 145 paragraph (4), and Article 161 paragraph (2) of the Election Law. The Petitioner believe those articles have led to legal uncertainty due to their ambiguity,” Nasef said virtually before Constitutional Justices Manahan M. P. Sitompul, Arief Hidayat, and Saldi Isra.

Relating to the subject matter, aside from detailing the articles petitioned in a table, the Petitioner also elaborated the article in the 1945 Constitution used as touchstones. They also added the latest Constitutional Court decisions on party verification.

Also read: Labor Party Challenges Factual Verification Requirements 

The case No. 78/PUU-XX/2022 was filed by the Labor Party, represented by president Said Iqbal and secretary-general Ferri Nurzali. They felt harmed by the enactment of Article 173 paragraph (1) and Article 177 letter f of the Election Law along the phrase ‘citizens in each regency/city’ as well as Article 75 paragraph (4), Article 145 paragraph (4), and Article 161 paragraph (2) along the phrase ‘shall consult with the DPR.’

“There are two issues in the petition: the verification of prospective party as election contestant and the rule-making by election organizers, in this case [the KPU (General Elections Commission)], Bawaslu [(Elections Supervisory Body)], and the DKPP [(Election Organizer Ethics Council)],” attorney Said Salahudin said at the preliminary hearing on Monday, August 29.

In the petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court invalidate Article 173 paragraph (1) of the Election Law along the word ‘verification’ if not interpreted to mean ‘administrative verification’ and Article 177 letter f along the phrase ‘citizens in each regency/city’ if not interpreted to mean ‘citizens residing in one regency/city following their electronic resident identity card (e-KTP) or family card (KK) or citizens residing in one regency/city in accordance with the population certificate by the authorized institution in population and civil registry.’

They also requested that the Court declare Article 75 paragraph (4), Article 145 paragraph (4), and Article 161 paragraph (2) of the Election Law along the phrase ‘shall consult with the DPR’ unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted to mean ‘in a hearing meeting whose decision is not binding.’

Writer        : Nano Tresna Arfana
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Raisa A. M.
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 9/13/2022 18:25 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.

---