The Respondent and its legal counsels attending a hearing for case No. 272-01-04-06/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 on the 2024 Legislative Election Results Dispute to hear the Respondent and Bawaslu, Monday (5/13/2024). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.
JAKARTA (MKRI) - The Constitutional Court (MK) held another hearing on the 2024 DPR/DPRD (House of Representatives/Regional Legislative Council) Election Results Dispute (PHPU) of Case No. 272-01-04-06/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 on Monday (5/13/2024) at 19.50 WIB. The petition was filed by the Party of Functional Groups (Golkar) on the filling of membership in the North Musi Rawas Regency DPRD. In this electoral district (dapil) of North Musi Rawas, Golkar questions the accuracy of the vote count results conducted by the Respondent (the General Election Commission/KPU). Allegations center around discrepancies in the vote tallying across 17 polling stations (TPS), including 4 in Embacang Lama Village, 6 in Embacang Baru Ilir Village, and 7 in Embacang Baru Village.
The hearing was conducted by Panel 3 presided over by Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat, accompanied by Constitutional Justices Anwar Usman and Enny Nurbaningsih. The agenda of the heating included hearing the Respondent's (KPU) response, statements from relevant parties, and testimony from the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu), as well as the verification of evidence.
Through legal counsel Paulus Gondo Wijoyo, the Respondent argued that the petition from the Golkar (Petitioner) was obscure or obscuur libel. According to the Respondent, the content within the petitum includes a request to annul the stipulation of the vote count results by the Respondent and establish the correct vote count results according to the Petitioner. The Respondent claims that it does not comply with the provisions of Article 59, paragraph a of the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2023, thus rendering the Petition inadmissible.
"The Petitioner's petition fails to meet the provisions of Article 8 jo. Article 11 of the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK), as it includes additional elements beyond what is stipulated. Specifically, in the petitum section, it also commands the Respondent to conduct a re-vote. However, in the substantive part of the Petition, the Petitioner does not elaborate on the instruction for the Respondent to conduct a re-vote. Consequently, besides not meeting the requirements of Article 8 jo. Article 11 of the PMK, the Petition also becomes ambiguous," stated the Respondent’s legal counsel, Paulus Gondo Wijoyo.
Moreover, the Respondent contends that the Petitioner's petition is presumptive as it fails to provide the accurate vote count results as claimed. It lacks supporting evidence. Furthermore, within the petitum, the Petitioner requests a vote recount, oblivious to the fact that such a recount has already been conducted.
As the Petitioner seeks both a recount, despite one having already been conducted, and a revote, their request is obscure and ambiguous (obscuur libel), lacking compliance with the necessary standards. Hence, it's justifiable and appropriate to deem the Petitioner's petition inadmissible (niet ontvankelijke verklaard).
"Regarding the arguments presented by the Petitioner in the petition, the Respondent outrightly rejects them all because the Petitioner fails to present a comparison of vote count results. The Petitioner only alleges irregularities in the villages of Embacang Baru, Embacang Lama, and Embacang Baru Ilir," stated the Respondent’s legal counsel, Paulus Gondo.
Therefore, the Respondent requests the Court to grant its objection in its entirety; dismiss the Petitioner's request entirely; affirm the KPU's Decree on the a quo case and stipulate the correct vote acquisition according to the Respondent.
PDI-P’s Response
The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) as a Relevant Party in this case asserts that the petitum of the Petitioner's petition is obscure as to what exactly the Petitioner is requesting the Court to decide. Whether the Petitioner seeks a vote recount or a re-vote remains ambiguous.
Moreover, in response to the Petitioner's arguments, the Relevant Party fundamentally rejects all of the Petitioner's claims. They consider the Petitioner's arguments to be merely speculative and inconsistent with the facts and prevailing laws and regulations.
Furthermore, the Relevant Party addresses the petition regarding alleged inaccuracies in the vote count results at 17 TPS, identified as 7 in Embacang Baru Village, 6 in Embacang Baru Ilir Village, and 4 in Embacang Lama Village. According to them, all of the Petitioner's witnesses have signed the Form C Result, and none of them have submitted any objections or specific incidents. Additionally, the Relevant Party argues that the Petitioner's claim regarding the inability of their witnesses to take photographs of the Form C Result is unfounded. The witnesses signed the Form C Result Plano, and documenting it is not prohibited. This action is within everyone's rights, including those who witness the vote counting process, which takes place openly and is observed by all political party witnesses. However, if the Petitioner's witnesses choose not to document it, it does not imply any prohibition; such assumptions are solely made by the Petitioner.
"The Respondent requests the Court to grant the Relevant Party's objection in its entirety, declare the a quo petition inadmissible, dismiss the Petitioner's plea, and affirm the vote acquisition according to the Respondent," stated the Relevant Party’s legal counsel, Fajri Safii.
Bawaslu’s Statement
In its statement, Bawaslu (Election Supervisory Board) responded to reports of alleged election violations with Reference No.: 002/LP/PL/KAB/06.17/II/2024 on February 16, 2024. The follow-up to this report could not be registered due to formal requirements not being met, although substantive requirements were fulfilled. Subsequently, the Bawaslu of North Musi Rawas Regency issued a notification of the status of the findings/report to the reporter on February 23, 20.
Regarding report 027/LP/PL/KAB/06.17/II/2024, it was officially registered under registration no.: 003/REG/LP/PL/KAB/06.17/III/2024. However, due to the report's failure to meet the criteria for election violations and the lack of response from both the reporter and witnesses to the clarification invitation, the process of addressing the violation was halted. Consequently, the Bawaslu of North Musi Rawas Regency issued a notification regarding the status of the findings/report to the reporter on March 14, 2024.
"The Bawaslu of North Musi Rawas Regency has carried out prevention duties in the form of a recommendation numbered: 032/PM.00.02/K.SS-07/02/2024, primarily urging the North Musi Rawas Regency KPU to ensure that the voting process is conducted properly," said the Bawaslu’s legal counsel, Ahmad Naafi.
Also read: Golkar Questions Vote Recapitulation in N. Musi Rawas
Author: Siti Rosmalina Nurhayati.
Editor: Nur R.
Translator: Naomi Andrea Zebua
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.
Monday, May 13, 2024 | 21:20 WIB 64