The petition revision hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections for case No. 12/PUU-XXI/2023, Monday (2/20/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ilham W. M.

---

Monday, February 20, 2023 | 13:31 WIB

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Association for Elections and Democracy (Perludem) conveyed their revised petition on the judicial review of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections at the Constitutional Court (MK) on Monday, February 20, 2023. The hearing for case No. 12/PUU-XXI/2023 was provided over by Constitutional Justices Saldi Isra (panel chair), Suhartoyo, and Wahiduddin Adams.

Through legal counsel Fadli Ramadhanil, the Petitioner stated that their elaboration of the Court’s jurisdiction had been expanded by adding statutory laws. They also had explained the Petitioner’s legal standing by elaborating the Petitioner’s work relating to the Regional Representatives Council (DPD), as the justices had advised. “We explained that since 2015, the DPD election had been the Petitioner’s concern and [we] would like it to be designed so as to go toward a democratic election process,” he said.

Fadli also said that the Petitioner had been concerned with DPD members’ requirements in 2015 and 2017. “So, our petition is part of the reinforcement of the Petitioner’s institution,” he stressed.

He also said that in the background of the petition, the Petitioner had also researched on corruption ex-convicts who have registered to run as DPD candidates.

Also read: Petitioner Requests Stricter Requirements for Ex-Convict MP Candidates

The petition No. 12/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by the Association for Elections and Democracy (Perludem). At the preliminary hearing on Monday, February 6, 2023, the Petitioner conveyed their challenge against Article 182 letter g of the Election Law, which reads, “Individuals, as mentioned in Article 181, is eligible to contest in the election of members of the DPD if they fulfill the following requirements: g. the 17 August 1945 Proclamation of Independence; g. having not been criminally punished by a verdict of a court with a fixed legal power due to committing a criminal act punished by incarceration of 5 (five) or more years, unless the individual openly and honestly announces to the public that they have served their time as a convict.”

Legal counsel Fadli Ramadhanil asserted that the Petitioner believed the article to be in violation of Article 1 paragraphs (2) and (3), Article 22E paragraph (1), and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution. He also explained that the election process has not been entirely free from corrupt practices. Data by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), for example that in 2018, showed that many political officials or officials elected or appointed through election or the highest were involved in corruption cases. “One of the reasons […] is the high cost of politics,” he said.

Fadli revealed that the Constitutional Court had handed down a decision promoting stricter requirements for electoral candidates, i.e. Decision No. 56/PUU-XVII/2019 on the requirements for ex-convicts in the regional election and Decision No. 87/PUU-XX/2022 on the requirements for ex-convicts in the legislative election.

Meanwhile the requirements for ex-convict DPD member candidates are not the same as those for ex-convict candidates for regional elections as well as elections for House of Representatives (DPR) and Regional Legislative Council (DPRD), despite them similarly being elected directly by the people.

In addition, he said, ex-convict DPD member candidates are required to openly and honestly reveal their previous conviction to the public but not barred for five years to run for election, despite this waiting period being highly important to allow them to adapt to society.

Therefore, in the provisional petitum, the Petitioner requested that the Court prioritize the examination of the petition to provide certainty so that the restrictions not apply to current DPD member candidates since the election candidacy has started since December 6, 2022.

The Petitioner also requested that the Court declare Article 182 letter g of the Election Law unconstitutional and not legally binding as long as it is not interpreted “having not been criminally punished by a verdict of a court with a fixed legal power due to committing a criminal act punished by incarceration of 5 (five) or more years, except for a criminal act of negligence and a political criminal act in the sense that the act was declared a criminal act in the positive law only because the perpetrator had a different political view from the regime in power; having not been subjected to an additional punishment of revocation of the right to vote by a verdict of a court with a fixed legal power; having passed 5 (five) years after they have served their time as a convict vote by a verdict of a court with a fixed legal power; is open and honest of their status as a former convict; and is not a repeat offender.” 

Writer        : Utami Argawati
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Raisa Ayuditha
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

Translation uploaded on 2/21/2023 12:12 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.

---