The Respondent’s witness Agus Ari testifying at a hearing on the dispute over the 2024 legislative election results in North Sumatra Province, Thursday (5/30/2024) on panel 1. Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — A follow-up examination hearing of the 2024 DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) election results dispute (PHPU) for the electoral district of South Nias Regency 6 was held by the Constitutional Court (MK) on Thursday, May 30, 2024, in the plenary courtroom. The case No. 184-01-04-02/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024 was presided over by Chief Justice Suhartoyo with the Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah on Panel 1.

At the hearing, Golkar (Party of Functional Groups) witness Agus Gari explained the plenary of recapitulation at the South Nias Regency KPU (General Elections Commission). He explained that there was a change in Golkar’s votes from the number originally listed in the Simuk Subdistrict D-result form at the recapitulation session, from 1,203 votes to 359 votes.

“The subdistrict witness reported Golkar’s votes as 1,203 votes and PDI-P (Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle) with 57 votes. Meanwhile, before the plenary session when the photocopy of the D-result form was distributed, it showed that Golkar had 359 votes while PDI-P had 117 votes,” said Agus.

Agus said that he had objected to the KPU as the plenary session chair. “The KPU could make revisions with confidence without having to be notified or supervised by Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Body). When the plenary session began, the KPU chairman immediately ordered the subdistrict election committee (PPK) of Simuk to read out the new D-result form. All the witnesses objected but we were ignored until then we were only given the objection and incident forms,” he explained.

At the hearing, the KPU presented Sifaomadodo Wau as a witness. He is a member of the South Nias Regency KPU for the technical division of the 2024 election. He explained that the Simuk subdistrict election committee (PPK) had held a plenary meeting and confirmed that they would deliver the ballot boxes and the calculated recapitulation results. However, Wau revealed that the Simuk PPK did not show up for more than eight days.

“We even looked for them on Batu Island of but we couldn't find them. Finally, we coordinated with the police and finally they showed up and were forced to come to the mandatory plenary session at the regency level,” said Wau.

Wau revealed that there were no objections during the reading of the special plenary session in Simuk Subdistrict. Meanwhile, the witnesses only objected when the results were read out at the provincial level.

“All witnesses were upset because there were differences in votes. Because it was getting chaotic, we left it to Bawaslu, who then issued a decision to hold a recount at the provincial level. [The vote change] happened to Golkar’s votes and there was an incident,” he explained.

Wau revealed that the witnesses also rejected the results because there were differences in the results presented by the Simuk PPK. Simuk PPK finally requested correction to the C-result form. “The changes were made by the Simuk PPK, not the Regency KPU. [South Nias Regency KPU] never gave that order,” he explained.

Wau said that after the provincial recount, the witnesses wanted another recount by opening the ballot boxes. However, the PPK requested the opportunity to correct the subdistrict D-result form. “[South Nias Regency KPU] informed the witnesses and Bawaslu agreed to give [PPK] the opportunity [to revise the form],” he said.

Meanwhile, Benimeritus Halawa said that in Simuk there were no supporting tools for duplication such as photocopy machine. So, the witnesses and the subdistrict election supervisory committee (Panwascam) did not have the subdistrict D-result form.

Also read:

Golkar Questions Vote Inflation of Legislative Candidates in South Nias 6

South Nias Bawaslu: Recount Already Conducted in Simuk Subdistrict

The Petitioner argued that the valid subdistrict D-result form for the South Nias Regency DPRD election in electoral district 6 was that dated February 20, which was signed by all PPK and witnesses present. However, the votes for parties and candidates inputted into Sirekap at the regency plenary session were sourced from the subdistrict D-result form dated March 5, 2024.

The Petitioner said that it had submitted an objection to change to the subdistrict D-result form at the regency recapitulation plenary session because the revision was carried out by the Simuk PPK without any political party witnesses in attendance.

Author              : Utami Argawati
Editor                : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR                    : Fauzan Febriyan
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.

---