Witnesses taking oath at a ruling hearing for the 2024 legislative election results dispute for Central Papua Province, Monday (5/27/2024). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.
JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held a follow-up hearing on the 2024 DPR-DPRD (House of Representatives-Regional Legislative Council) election results dispute petition filed by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) for the electoral district of Central Papua. The hearing for case No. 04-01-03-36/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 was presided over by Constitutional Justices Arief Hidayat (panel chair), Anwar Usman, and Enny Nurbaningsih on panel 3 on Monday, May 27, 2024. The hearing to examine evidence was attended by the Petitioner (PDI-P), the KPU (General Elections Commission) as the Respondent, the Relevant Party, and Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Body).
During the hearing, the Petitioner presented five witnesses to deliver statements before the Court: Aperaus Kiwak, Yakub Murib, Engkael Yolemal, Delis Murib, and Elimus Tabuni. The Respondent (KPU) presented witnesses Marten Kokoya and Hengky M. Tinal. Meanwhile, the Relevant Party did not present any witnesses.
PDI-P’s Witnesses
Aperaus Kiwak, the Petitioner’s witness who was a member of the district supervisory committee in Beoga District, Central Papua, explained to the panel of justices that the recapitulation at the special district level of Puncak Regency 2, which consists of 5 districts, was determined in Beoga District. Recapitulation was never carried out by the district election committee (PPD/PK). Kiwak claimed that in 4 districts that used the ikat system PDI-P received 7,939 votes from 7 villages (Beoga District), 2,498 votes from 3 villages (West Beoga District), 4,583 votes from 4 villages (Ogomanin District), and 800 votes from 1 village (East Beoga District).
“The total votes in electoral district 2 for PDI-P were 15,820 votes. However, the polling station working committee (KPPS) and polling committee (PPS) did not put the results of the agreement into the C-result forms, and they did not hold plenary meetings at the district up to regency levels. At the district level, the KPU dismissed 13 PPD members. The KPU went to Nabire Regency and issued a plenary meeting invitation, where it was discovered that PDI-P’s votes in the ikat system were all lost during the plenary meeting at the provincial level,” Kiwak explained.
Kiwak claimed the votes were given to the Nusantara Awakening Party (PKN) and the Democratic Party. The plenary document of the provincial-level recapitulation was not given.
At the hearing, it was discovered that Kiwak had been unofficially dismissed from the district committee via SMS by the KPU. However, Bawaslu asserted that Panwascam (subdistrict election supervisory committee) had never issued a letter of dismissal. It also asserted that the correct votes were those written in the D-result form.
The next witness, Yakub Murib, is a pastor and tribal chief in Beoga District. He said that on February 14, an ikat process was held in a field in Beoga District, with all community members, religious leaders, women leaders, and representatives of the KPU, Bawaslu, military (TNI), and Police all present.
“In Beoga District, all 7,939 votes were given to PDI-P. In West Beoga District, 2,498 votes were given to PDI-P. I witnessed this in the two districts. Other political parties did not get votes in the two districts,” said Murib.
The Petitioner’s other witness, Engkael Yolemal, is a village head for 20 years in one of the villages in Ogomanin District. He explained that all village heads, tribal chiefs, religious leaders, and women leaders as well as the community, the KPU, and Bawaslu were present at the tally processes. His statement supported that provided by Yakub Murib.
“From the Ogomanin District, 4 villages that gave votes to PDI-P, totaling 4,583 votes. Then, 800 more votes for PDI-P in East Beoga district,” said Engkael Yolemal.
The fourth witness for the Petitioner was Delis Murib, a former subdistrict election committee (PPK) member in Sinak District, Puncak Regency. He testified regarding the events on election day at the Trikora square, Sinak District. The election in electoral district 3, out of 7 districts, was focused on Sinak District. This was because Sinak District is the main district that has transportation access. He explained PDI’P’s lost votes were not recorded in the D-result form. In electoral district 3, 3 districts gave their votes to PDI-P.
“After the election process, there was a forced withdrawal of the district committee by the KPU so that the district plenary meeting was not held in Puncak Regency. All the results were taken to Mimika Regency and the agreed votes were not given to PDI-P as many as 2,281 votes, [but] were transferred to Gerindra,” explained Delis Murib.
At the end of the hearing, the Petitioner confirmed that all the results of the ikat agreement had been recorded into C-Result forms and delivered to the KPU office. These forms had been sent by the Petitioner to the KPU as evidence. Meanwhile, the D-result form read out by the KPU was different from the plenary D-result form.
Also read:
PDI-P Questions Missing Votes in Central Papua Electoral Districts
KPU: The Posita and Petitum of PDI-P Central Papua Province Are Unclear
Court Issues Interlocutory Decision on PDI-P’s Election Petition in Central Papua
Author : Siti Rosmalina Nurhayati.
Editor : Nur R.
Translator : Frity Michael Br Sembiring, 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.
Monday, May 27, 2024 | 13:28 WIB 100