The Petitioner's legal counsel while giving testimony in the Preliminary Session of Case No. 220-01-14-06/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 in the Legislative Election Results Disputes on Thursday (2/5/2024). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held a preliminary hearing for the House of Representatives (DPR) and Regional Legislative Council (DPRD) election results dispute (PHPU) on Thursday afternoon, May 2, 2024. The hearing was presided over by the Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (panel chair), Anwar Usman, and Enny Nurbaningsih.

The hearing took place at Panel 3 of the Court to examine Case No. 220-01-14-06/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024. This case was filed by the Democratic Party, represented by Agus Harimurti Yudhoyono as Chairman and Teuku Riefky Harsya as Secretary General, for the DPR election on behalf of Alfi N. Rustam candidate number 9 for the Electoral District (Dapil) South Sumatra II. The petition object is the General Election Commission (KPU) Decree No. 360 of 2024.

At the hearing, the Petitioner argued that there was an omission of 540 votes for Candidate Alfi N. Rustam and vote inflation in Tebing Tinggi and Muara Pinang Sub-districts. According to the Petitioner, fraud and manipulation caused the vote margin between the vote acquisition recorded in the C1 forms at each polling station (TPS) and the KPU recapitulation results, starting from the subdistrict level to the national level. Therefore, there was a vote inflation for other DPR candidates and a reduction in the Petitioner's votes.

"There are two main points of this petition. First, the loss of 540 votes for candidate Alfi N. Rustam and the vote inflation in Tebing Tinggi and Muara Pinang subdistricts," said Muhammad Mualimin as the Petitioner's legal counsel before the Justices Panel presided over by the Constitutional Judge Arief Hidayat.

In detail, the Petitioner mentioned a vote margin that occurred for internal legislative candidates and from outside the Petitioner's party. The vote inflation for legislative candidate H. Mirzan Ikbal at the subdistrict level recapitulation results amounted to 3,429 votes. Based on the Petitioner's evidence, the actual votes for H. Mirzan Ikbal was 3,948, while the recapitulation by the Respondent showed a total of 7,377 votes. This indicates that there was vote inflation in the subdistrict recapitulation whose source is unknown.

The vote inflation for legislative candidate Wahyu Sanjaya in the subdistrict level recapitulation results amounted to 20 votes. Based on the Petitioner's evidence, the actual votes for Wahyu Sanjaya was 425, while the recapitulation by the Respondent showed a total of 445 votes. This indicates vote inflation in the subdistrict recapitulation whose source is unknown.

The vote inflation for legislative candidate Sri Meliyana in the subdistrict level recapitulation results amounted to 3,254 votes. Based on the Petitioner's evidence, the actual votes for Sri Meliyana was 759, while the recapitulation by the Respondent showed a total of 4,014 votes. This shows that there was vote inflation in the subdistrict recapitulation whose source is unknown.

The vote inflation for legislative candidate Bobi Adhityo R in the subdistrict level recapitulation results amounted to 1,088 votes. Based on the Petitioner's evidence, the actual number of votes for Bobi Adhityo R is 2,174, while the recapitulation by the Respondent shows a total of 3,262 votes. This shows the  vote inflation in the subdistrict recapitulation whose source is unknown.

The vote inflation for legislative candidate Dr. H. Andi at the subdistrict level recapitulation results amounted to 1,493 votes. Based on the Petitioner's evidence, the actual number of votes for Dr. H. Andi was 138, while the recapitulation by the Respondent showed a total of 1,631 votes. This shows that there was vote inflation in the subdistrict recapitulation whose source is unknown.

In its petition, the Petitioner also asserted that the Respondent's actions which reduced the Petitioner's votes showed the Respondent's recapitulation results, from the subdistrict level to the national level in the South Sumatra II, could not be trusted and were not based on actual results. The Respondent clearly not only added votes for other candidates which were clearly detrimental to the Petitioner, but also significantly reduced the Petitioner's votes.

Based on the aforementioned arguments, the Petitioner requests the Court to grant his Petition by canceling the KPU Decree No. 360 of 2024 and ordering the Respondent to conduct a recount for DPR candidates in South Sumatera II.(*)

Author : Adam Ilyas
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
Public Relation : Tiara Agustina

Translator : Intana Selvira Fauzi (RA)

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.

 

---