The second hearing for the judicial review case No. 31/PUU-XXI/2023 of the Constitutional Court Law in the panel courtroom, Thursday (5/4/2023). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another judicial review petition of Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court as amended by Law No. 7 of 2020 on the Third Amendment to Law No. 24 of 2003 on the Constitutional Court to and Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections. The case No. 31/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by Herifuddin Daulay, a teacher.

This second hearing took place on Thursday, May 4, 2023 in the panel courtroom. The Petitioner asserts that Article 74 paragraph (3) and Article 78 letter a of the Constitutional Court Law as well Article 475 paragraphs (1) and (3) of the Election Law were in violation of Article 1 paragraph (2), Article 6A paragraph (1), Article 27 paragraph (3), and Article 22E paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

Virtually, the Petitioner conveyed revisions to the petition following the constitutional justices’ advice at the previous hearing. He added Article 1 paragraph (3) and Article 24 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution as touchstones, revised his legal standing, and clarify the background to the petition on the deadline for the election results dispute examination in the Court.

“Eliminating the people’s portion means demeaning human rights and legal subjects, so the people and citizens have the right to file this case,” he said before Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra and Constitutional Justices and Wahiduddin Adams and Suhartoyo.

Also read: Deadline for Resolving Presidential Election Dispute in Constitutional Court Law Challenged

At the preliminary hearing on Wednesday, April 5, the Petitioner argued it would be very unlikely for the Court to be able to settle disputes over the results of the presidential election fairly within fourteen workdays since the Court would do a complete analysis of the petition’s reasons. A thirty-workday deadline following the deadline for the resolution of disputes over the results of legislative election, he asserted, would be ideal.

Therefore, the Petitioner requested that the Court declare Article 74 paragraph (3) of the Constitutional Court Law not legally binding if not interpreted as “no later than 3 (three days) and/or after 900 (nine hundred) days;” Article 78 letter a of the Constitutional Court Law not legally binding if not interpreted as “no later than 30 (thirty) days after the petition is recorded in the constitutional case registration book;” the phrase “at the latest 3 (three) days” in Article 475 paragraph (1) of the Election Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “3 (three days) and/or after 900 (nine hundred) days;” and the phrase “14 (fourteen) days” in Article 475 paragraph (3) of the Election Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “30 (thirty) days.”

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR            : M. Halim
Translator  : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

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.

---