The Petitioner’s witness Fitzgerald Lintin at an evidentiary hearing for the 2024 legislative election dispute of South Kalimantan Province, Wednesday (5/29/2024) on panel 1. Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court held an evidentiary hearing for the Regency/City DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) election results dispute for South Kalimantan Province. The case No. 191-01-03-22/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 was filed by PDI-P (Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle). The hearing was presided over by Chief Justice Suhartoyo and Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah.

At the session to hear witness/expert testimonies, PDI-P presented Dian Permata, a researcher at the Founding Father House. She said vote counting issues in elections is one of the oldest constitutional law issues.

“At the voting and recapitulation stages in elections, the potential for either intentional or unintentional vote purge is very likely, one of which is due to maladministration by election organizers,” she said.

At the same hearing, the justices also heard the Petitioner’s witness, Fitzgerald Lintin, who was a PDI-P witness. He said he had filed an objection because of vote inflation, especially for PAN, which resulted in PDI-P losing seats.

“At that time, [I] immediately talked to the KPU and provided data on the findings of vote inflation that benefitted PAN,” he said.

He emphasized that the KPU (General Elections Commission) responded to his objection and explained that the evidence submitted concerned more than 740 polling stations, so there was not enough time to make corrections. “For the objection that I raised, the KPU suggested following the correction process in Bawaslu,” he explained.

He said the comparison of data from the 740 polling stations proved that there was vote inflation. However, from the results of Bawaslu’s (Elections Supervisory Body) decision, there was no rebuttal from the KPU or the Relevant Party (PAN).

Meanwhile, PAN as Relevant Party presented experts, including constitutional law lecturer at the Law Faculty of Sebelas Maret University Agus Riewanto. He explained that according to Article 473 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Election Law, a dispute over the DPR, DPD, and DPRD election results (PHPU) includes dispute between the KPU and the election participants regarding the nationwide certified election results. Therefore, only the certification of the national vote acquisition that can affect the vote acquisition of election participants can be petitioned.

“Reports of alleged administrative violations of vote recapitulation after the determination of the national election results by the KPU, based on the Election Law, are considered nonexistent because every report of alleged violations of election administration should be terminated by Bawaslu through an initial review to then be submitted to the Constitutional Court in a written statement,” he explained.

He said Bawaslu’s action to terminate reports of alleged election administrative violations after the declaration of the national election results by the KPU was intended to provide legal certainty in terms of deadline for such reports to Bawaslu. He said that Bawaslu can give sanctions if the reported PPK (subdistrict election committee) and KPU are proven to have committed administrative violations in vote counting and recapitulation.

However, this provision would become a legal problem if it is carried out after the determination of votes nationwide by the KPU. Article 474 of the Election Law states that only the Constitutional Court is authorized to adjudicate disputes over the determination of the election results. Overlapping reporting would lead to legal uncertainty and double KPU recapitulation results while the dispute is being reviewed by the Constitutional Court.

Also read:

PDI-P Fights for Fifth Seat in South Kalimantan I

Bawaslu: KPU Violated Recapitulation Procedure in South Kalimantan Province

PDI-P (Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle) argued that it should have obtained the fifth seat for the DPR (House of Representatives) in the electoral district of South Kalimantan II. However, the KPU as Respondent did not determine the Petitioner as the elected candidate in South Kalimantan II. The Petitioner asserted that PDI-P’s failure was due to vote inflation for the National Mandate Party (PAN) in several polling stations (TPS) throughout Kotabaru Regency as many as 807 votes. Based on the Petitioner’s copies of C-result forms, PAN’s vote count was 487 votes, while PDI-P’s vote count certified by the Respondent was 1,294 votes. So, there was 807 votes difference.

According to the Petitioner, there had been an increase in PAN’s votes in several polling stations in Tanah Bumbu by 5,488 votes. According to the Petitioner’s C-result forms, PAN’s vote count amounted to 7,048 votes, while the Respondent certified it as 12,536 votes, so the margin was 5,488 votes in Tanah Bumbu spread across up to 203 polling stations in 29 villages in 6 subdistricts.

In addition, he also explained that there were additional votes for PAN in several polling stations in Banjarmasin totaling 9,395 votes. For this reason, in its petitum, it requests the Court to cancel the KPU Decree No. 360 of 2024 and determine the correct vote acquisition for PDI-P based on the copy of C-result forms according to the Petitioner, which is 89,875 votes. Meanwhile, on the D-result forms it is 89,875 votes, while PAN’s is 262,315 votes.

Author              : Utami Argawati
Editor                : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR                    : Fauzan Febriyan
Translator         : M. Ariva Aswin Bahar/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.

---