Chief Justice Suhartoyo, Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, and Chief Registrar Muhidin talking at a ruling hearing on the requirement for candidates of members of the DPR and provincial and regency/city DPRD, Wednesday (1/31/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) declared the case No. 167/PUU-XXI/2023 inadmissible. The case concerns the material judicial review of Article 1 point 27 juncto Article 240 paragraph (1) letter n of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections regarding the requirement of being a member of political party contesting in election for candidates of members of the DPR (House of Representatives) and provincial and regency/city DPRD (Regional Legislative Council).

“[The Court] declared the Petitioner’s petition inadmissible,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo at a plenary ruling hearing on Wednesday, January 31, 2024 in the plenary courtroom.

In its legal opinions, delivered by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra, the Court observed a contradiction between the posita and the petitum relating the subject matter on Article 1 point 27 of the Election Law. The petitum did not support the Petitioner’s wish for any prospective independents candidate to run for a seat in the DPR, provincial DPRD, and regency/city DPRD.

Meanwhile, in the posita, the Petitioner alleged that Article 240 paragraph (1) letter n of the Election Law was unconstitutional and not legally binding if “not interpreted” as he mentioned. On the other hand, in the petitum he stated that said article was unconstitutional and not legally binding if interpreted as he mentioned. He should have used the phrase “if not interpreted” in the petitum, to adjust it to the posita.

Due to the inconsistency between the posita (background of petition) and the petitum (the Petitioner’s request), the Court had not doubt to declare the petition obscure. As per Article 74 paragraph (1) of the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2021, the Court can declare a petition obscure due to: inconsistency between the argument in the posita and the petitum.

“Considering that the Petitioner’s petition is obscure, the legal standing, subject matter, and other matters were not considered further due to irrelevance,” said Justice Saldi.

Also read:

Petitioner Seeks Way to Become MP as an Independent

House Candidacy Through Political Party Challenged

The case No. 167/PUU-XXI/2023 was filed by advocate M. Robby Candra to run for a seat in the DPR or DPRD as an independent candidate. He felt the norms being petitioned had harmed his constitutional rights as he could not be a legislative candidate because he did not meet the requirement of party membership.

Article 1 number 27 of the Election Law reads, “Election Contestants shall be political parties that compete as participants in the legislative elections (electing members of the DPR, Provincial DPRD, Regency/City DPRD), individuals that participate in election of DPD members, and candidate tickets proposed by political parties (or a coalition thereof) as presidential/vice-presidential candidates.” Article 240 paragraph (1) letter n reads, “A person registering as a candidate for a member of the DPR, Provincial DPRD, or Regency/City DPRD shall be an Indonesian citizen who fulfill the following requirements: n. registered as a member of a political party contesting in an election.”

The Petitioner used Article 28D paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution as touchstone. He believed the requirement requiring a DPR/DPRD candidate to be political party member participating in election constitutes discrimination against individual Indonesian citizens. Therefore, the he said, the norm was contrary to the constitutional right that every citizen was entitled to equal opportunities in government, which is guaranteed by the Constitution.

In his petitum, the Petitioner requested the Court to declare Article 1 point 27 of the Election Law unconstitutional and not legally binding if interpreted as “Election Contestants are political parties and individuals that compete as participants in the legislative elections (electing members of the DPR, Provincial DPRD, Regency/City DPRD), individuals that participate in election of DPD members, and candidate tickets proposed by political parties (or a coalition thereof) as presidential/vice-presidential candidates.” He also asked the Court to declare Article 240 paragraph (1) letter n unconstitutional and not legally binding if interpreted as, “A person registering as a candidate for a member of the DPR, Provincial DPRD, or Regency/City DPRD shall be an Indonesian citizen who fulfill the following requirements: n. registered as a member of a political party contesting in an election or an independent.”

Author       : Mimi Kartika
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.

---