Chief Justice Anwar Usman reading out the Court’s verdict at the ruling hearing of the judicial review of Law No. 2 of 2011 on concurrent positions of political party’s leaders, Wednesday (8/30/2023). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Article 2 paragraph (1b) of Law No. 2 of 2011 on the Amendment to Law No. 2 of 2008 on Political Parties did not mention any restriction on the tenure of political party chairperson, but on party founder and executive members concurrently being a member of another political party.

The statement is part of the Court’s legal opinion delivered by Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah on the material judicial review of the Political Party Law filed by Risky Kurniawan, who alleged that Article 2 paragraph (1b) of the Political Party Law was in violation of Article 1 paragraph (2) and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

At the ruling hearing for Decision No. 77/PUU-XXI/2023 on Wednesday, August 30, 2023, Justice Guntur also said that in the petitum, the Petitioner requested that the article be declared unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted to mean “executive members of a political party, especially the chairman or any designation following the party’s statute and bylaws, shall hold office for five years and can only be reelected twice in the same position, either consecutively or not, and the founder and executive members of the political party shall not be the concurrent member of another political party.”

The Court asserted that the petitum was not appropriate since the addition to the phrase would eliminate the real meaning of the article, given that what was requested and what was set forth in the norm were different. Therefore, the Court held that they could not be combined to form a new interpretation of the a quo article.

“The substance that the Petitioner requested was inappropriate. He should have challenged the norm in Chapter IX on management, but he did Chapter II on the formation of a political party. As such, the article petitioned for review was inaccurate and led to an obscure petitum,” Justice Guntur added.

Legal Standing

Based on the Petitioner’s party’s (Golkar) statute/bylaws, the ones who have legal standing to file a petition are its executive members who have the right to elect and be elected as a chairperson. The Petitioner’s status as an individual citizen does not automatically mean he represented the party’s aspiration, since he was not an executive and joined the party for only a few months. He also did not attend the party’s national meeting (munas) as stipulated in Golkar’s statute/bylaws, Article 39 paragraph (2) letter b point IV.

The Court declared the Petitioner lacking legal standing to file the petition and thus declared the petition inadmissible.

“[The Court] adjudicated, declares the Petitioner’s petition inadmissible,” aid Chief Justice Anwar Usman alongside the other eight constitutional justices while delivering the verdict of Decision No. 77/PUU-XXI/2023.

Also read:

Young Golkar Member Challenges Term of Office of Chairperson

Young Golkar Member Clarifies Petition on Party’s Chairperson Term of Office 

Article 2 paragraph (1b) of the Political Party Law reads, “The founder and the executive members of a Political Party shall not be the concurrent member of another political party.”

At the preliminary hearing on Thursday, July 27, the Petitioner’s legal counsel Otniel Raja Maruli Situmorang said that the Petitioner had been a member of the Golongan Karya (Golkar) Party since June 30, 2023 and had made a goal that in the future, after making sizeable contributions to the party, he would seek to become the party’s chairperson. However, due to the absence of a binding regulation on the term of office of a party chairperson in the Political Party Law, his target was restricted. The absence had left the Golkar Party chairperson able to hold office indefinitely, despite the fact that the party’s statute/bylaws regulate this.

In the petitum, the Petitioner—a law student of the International University of Batam—requested that the Court declare Article 2 paragraph (1b) of Law No. 2 of 2011 on the Amendment to Law No. 2 of 2008 on Political Parties in violation of the 1945 Constitution and not having legal force if not interpreted to mean “executive members of a political party, especially the chairman or any designation following the party’s statute and bylaws, shall hold office for five years and can only be reelected twice in the same position, either consecutively or not, and the founder and executive members of the political party shall not be the concurrent member of another political party.”

Author       : Sri Pujianti
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Muhammad 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.

---