Fathul Hadie Utsman (Petitioner) conveying the revisions to petition against Law No. 7 of 2011 on General Elections, Monday (3/4/2024). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Father and son who challenge Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law) attended the petition revision hearing for case No. 21/PUU-XXII/2024 on Monday, March 3, 2024. They filed a material judicial review petition of Article 14 letter c, Article 342 paragraph (2), Article 414 paragraph (1), Article 415 paragraph (2), Article 419, and Article 420 letters b, c, and d of the Election Law.

The father, Fathul Hadie Utsman, conveyed the revisions to the petition, which included the subject, the format, the elaboration of the Petitioners’ legal standing, and the reasons for the petition. “Taking notes from previous petitions, [we] took what are relevant,” said Fathul, who attended the hearing on site.

Meanwhile, son A.D. Afkar Rara attended the hearing—presided over by Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra and Constitutional Justices Ridwan Mansyur and Arief Hidayat—online.

Fathul reiterated one of the petitums: for the Court to declare Article 14 letter c, Article 342 paragraph (2), Article 414 paragraph (1), Article 415 paragraph (2), Article 419, and Article 420 letters b, c, and d of the Election Law unconstitutional and not legally binding. The Petitioners also request that the Court reinterpreted those articles.

They wish that Article 14 letter c be interpreted to require the General Elections Commission (KPU) to disseminate all information on the legislative candidates—at least their names—to the public through the press and social media, and even door-to-door. They alleged that they had not received sufficient information on the parties’ visions and missions as well as the legislative candidates’ profiles despite Article 14 letter c requiring the KPU to disseminate all information on the implementation of the election to the public. They alleged that their right to such information was unfulfilled.

Those petitums are the same as those conveyed at the preliminary hearing on Tuesday, February 20, when Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat highlighted the peculiarity of the petitums. If they were not revised, he asserted, they might be declared obscure or unclear.

Before adjourning the hearing, the panel of justices approved several pieces of evidence that the Petitioners had submitted. Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra said that the revisions to the petition would be forwarded to the justice deliberation meeting (RPH), which must be attended by at least seven justices. The meeting would decide whether the case would be ruled after a plenary hearing or without evidentiary examinations.

“[The panel] will not decide. We will only forward [the case] to the justice deliberation meeting. please, Mr. Fathul Hadie and Afkar Rara, wait for the Court’s further information,” he said.

Also read: Father-Son Challenge Election Law

Author       : Mimi Kartika
Editor        : Nur R.
PR            : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
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.

---