A ruling hearing for the 2024 legislative election results dispute presided over by nine constitutional justices, Tuesday (5/21/2024). Photo by MKRI/Teguh.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) declared the case No. 135-02-10-16/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 on the South Tangerang City DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) electoral district 2 election results dispute (PHPU) inadmissible. According to the Court, the petition filed by legislative candidate form the People’s Conscience Party (Hanura) R Ida Dariyah was inconsistent or contradictory between posita and petitum.

“In the posita, the Petitioner does not clearly and properly elaborate the arguments behind the Petitioner’s conclusion that the petition for a revote is only in South Tangerang City 2,” said Justice M. Guntur Hamzah at a ruling hearing in the plenary courtroom on Tuesday, May 21, 2024.

He explained that the Petitioner basically disputed the delay of the stipulation of the South Tangerang KPU (General Elections Commission) Decrees No. 284 and No. 287 of 2024 on the certification of the recapitulation results of the 2024 South Tangerang City DPRD dated March 6 and March 17 respectively, which according to the Petitioner had exceeded 20 days after voting day. Therefore, the Petitioner believed the decrees were legally flawed.

However, after the Court carefully examined the petition, it turns out that there was contradiction between posita and petitum. If what was argued was the legal defect of the South Tangerang City KPU Decrees No. 284 and No. 287 of 2024, which results in the legal defect of the KPU Decree No. 360 of 2024, the Petitioner should have requested a revote in all electoral districts of South Tangerang City DPRD, not only for South Tangerang City 2.

Moreover, in posita, the Petitioner did not elaborate clearly and adequately the arguments behind the conclusion that a revote only needed in South Tangerang City 2. Based on the legal facts, the petition did not meet the qualifications as referred to in Article 75 of the Constitutional Court Law and Article 11 paragraph (2) letter b points 4 and 5 of the Constitutional Court Regulation No. 2 of 2023.

“The Petitioner’s petitum and posita were inconsistent, there was no clear and adequate explanation in the posita, and the petition did not explain the Respondent’s calculation error and the correct vote acquisition results according to the Petitioner nor did it contain a request to cancel the results of the vote count determined by the Respondent and to determine the correct vote count according to the Petitioner, so there was no doubt for the Court to declare the Petitioner’s petition vague,” Justice Guntur explained.

Also read:

Hanura Candidate Claims KPU Decision Flawed, Asks South Tangerang 2 Repeat DPRD Election

KPU: South Tangerang City Recapitulation by the Rules

Relating to exceptions, the Court granted the Respondent’s exception on the obscurity of the petition, while relating to the subject matter, it declared the Petitioner’s petition inadmissible.

“In the subject matter: [the Court] declares the Petitioner’s petition inadmissible,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo alongside the other constitutional justices.

Author              : Mimi Kartika
Editor                : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR                    : Fauzan Febriyan
Translator         : Jessica Rivena Meilania, Yuniar W.

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.

---