Legally Unfounded, the Court Rejects NasDem's Election Dispute Petition for West Java I

The Ruling hearing of Legislative PHPU for West Java Province on Thursday (6/6/2024) in the Plenary Courtroom of the Constitutional Court. Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the petition by NasDem (National Democratic Party) regarding the general election for the candidates of the House of Representatives from the West Java I electoral district, on Thursday, June 6, 2024, in the Plenary Courtroom of the MK. The Case No 90-01-05-12/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024, was filed by NasDem.

In the legal considerations presented by Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh, it was stated that based on the evidence and legal facts revealed, the Respondent had followed the Bawaslu decision as instructed, which included comparing the Model C. Results form with Model D.Results form as recorded in the General Elections Commission (KPU) Sirekap at several polling stations (TPS) where administrative violations were not confirmed during the rapid verification process.

The Bawaslu decision did not explicitly instruct the KPU to take specific actions after scrutinizing the data contained in Model C.Results and Model D.Results form in Sirekap KPU. Moreover, the comparison of data from Model C.Results with Model D.Results form as ordered by the Bawaslu decision was actually based on Model C.Results and Model D.Results from found in Sirekap KPU. 

Despite issues with Sirekap, Daniel continued, the Court has ruled that it cannot be used as an official reference for determining the manual hierarchical vote count up to the national level. However, since this was a recommendation by Bawaslu and the recommendation has been followed by the Respondent, the Court cannot further assess this matter, especially regarding the follow-up actions taken by the Respondent, which none of the parties objected to.

Apart from the Petitioner's claim related to the Bawaslu decision as considered by the Court, after examining the evidence presented by the Petitioner, Respondent, Related Parties, and Bawaslu, and conducting spot checks on evidence such as Model D.Results form for the District, Model C.Results, special incident reports, and evidence of scrutiny submitted by the Respondent at the polling stations alleged by the Petitioner to have experienced vote shifting or vote inflation by Golkar (Party of Functional Groups), the Court found that the data in Model C.Results Copy-DPR matched the data in Model D.Results District-DPR.

Even if there were differences in the data obtained, after the Court examined the scrutiny results performed by the Respondent as documented in Letter No. 214/PL.01.8-SD/32/2024 and then compared them with evidence such as Special Incident Reports and/or objections by witnesses, the data differences in Model C.Results and Model D.Results in Sirekap as claimed by the Petitioner were confirmed in the hierarchical vote count and were recorded in the valid Model C Results and Model D from Results for the District-DPR.

Furthermore, Constitutional Justice Daniel added, based on several special incident reports and objections by witnesses, the Court found that the vote changes that occurred at the polling station level or at the district plenary meetings due to corrections or revisions were often not recorded in the Sirekap data.

Additionally, Constitutional Justice Daniel continued, the Petitioner had based their petition on alleging a reduction of 494 votes for the Petitioner and an addition/inflation of 472 votes for Related Party I. However, after the Court carefully reviewed the evidence from the Petitioner, the Respondent, Related Party I, and Bawaslu, the Court could not find any evidence in the form of an Annex from the Bawaslu decision. Therefore, since the Petitioner alleged vote totals without sufficient evidence, the Court could not verify the truthfulness of the vote totals claimed by the Petitioner. Thus, based on these legal considerations, the Petitioner's claims are legally unfounded.

Concerning all the legal considerations above, the Court opined that the Petitioner's claims concerning the vote acquisition for the candidates of the House of Representatives in the West Java I are legally unfounded in their entirety.

"Regarding the Petitioner's other claims and related matters concerning the aforementioned petition, they are not further considered as they are irrelevant according to the Court and therefore must also be declared legally unfounded," he stated.

Also read : 
Votes Switched to Golkar, NasDem Asks West Java I Tally Canceled
KPU Denies Intentionally Violating Election Principles in Bekasi City 2
NasDem Expert: Election Organizers Must Obey the Law

Previously, in the preliminary hearing, the Petitioner alleged a discrepancy in NasDem votes in the West Java (Jabar) I due to vote inflation by Golkar and a reduction in NasDem votes that occurred during the plenary meeting for the 2024 Election recapitulation at the subdistrict level in several Subdistrict Election Committees within Bandung City. Furthermore, the Petitioner also alleged a reduction in their votes and an increase in votes for the United Development Party (PPP) as mentioned above, which disadvantaged the Petitioner's vote acquisition and led to the obtaining a seat in the City Council of Bekasi 2. 

Author : Utami Argawati

Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR :  Fauzan Febriyan
Translator : Gabrielle K.W/Fuad Subhan

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.


Thursday, June 06, 2024 | 14:42 WIB 39