The ruling hearing for the material judicial review of Article 415 paragraph (3) of Law No. 7 of 2017 on Elections, Tuesday (8/20/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.
The ruling hearing for the material judicial review of Article 415 paragraph (3) of Law No. 7 of 2017 on Elections, Tuesday (8/20/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.
JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) has handed down Decision No. 58/PUU-XXII/2024 for for the material judicial review of Article 415 paragraph (3) of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections (Election Law). The petition was filed by Abdul Basir, a lecturer. The Court found the petition’s substance unclear, thus in its verdict it declared the petition inadmissible.
In its legal considerations, delivered by Constitutional Justice Arsul Sani, the Court asserted the petition basically questioned the Sainte-Laguë conversion method applied by the Election Law. The Court did not find any alternative vote conversion method that the Petitioner thought would be more appropriate. The absence of an alternative method resulted the disconnection in the petition’s arguments, because a request to replace or change a norm should be accompanied by an alternative replacement of the norm in question.
“The Petitioner may not simply ask for a norm to be annulled, which will certainly result in a legal vacuum, unless he really wishes that a norm or legal rule be abolished and then the arrangement that he desired is left to the community’s free will or agreement,” Justice Arsul said at the ruling hearing on Tuesday, August 20, 2024 in the plenary courtroom.
The Court could not understand the Petitioner’s petitums, especially the phrase “in line with the 2024 legislative candidate election” in point 2. Such a petitum did not meet the usual petitum for judicial review as set forth in Article 10 paragraph (2) letter d point 2 of the Constitutional Court Regulation (PMK) No. 2 of 2021.
Justice Arsul added that if the Petitioner wished for such a petitum be applied to the 2024 election, it must be a separate one.
The phrase “in line with the 2024 legislative candidate election” in the Petitioner’s petitum allowed for questions and interpretation that the Petitioner should have answered, but was not answered in the posita. It was not clear whether he wished that Article 415 paragraph (3) of Law No. 7 of 2017 be removed only temporarily (for the results of the 2024 election) or permanently, and what the legal consequences of those options would be.
The Court also asserted that the petition did not fulfill the formal requirements for a judicial review petition because he had submitted nine pieces of evidence but not the Election Law, which was petitioned, although at the preliminary hearing on Thursday, July 11 he had been reminded to attach the Law as evidence.
“Based on such a legal opinion, the Court judged that the substance or material of the petition on the constitutionality of Article 415 paragraph (3) of Law No. 7 of 2017 filed by the Petitioner was unclear. As such, the a quo petition was obscure (obscuur libel) and the Court did not need to consider the Petitioner’s legal standing and the petition’s subject matter any further,” Justice Arsul said.
Also read:
Failed to Run for DPRD, Candidate Challenges Seat-Counting Method
Controversial Vote Counting Method Stirs Legislative Disputes
Abdul Basir, a DPRD (Regional Legislative Council) candidate of Tegal City in the 2024 election, questioned the seat-counting method for the provincial and regency/city DPRD election. He had earned 2,186 valid votes in the electoral district of Tegal City 1, or the second highest votes within PKB (National Awakening Party). However, PKB had only earned one vote based on the method stipulated in the a quo article out of the nine seats in said electoral district.
Therefore, the Petitioner failed to get a seat. He felt his constitutional right to be elected as a legislative candidate had been harmed as candidates of other parties with fewer votes earned had received a seat in the Tegal City DPRD based on that provision.
“It is not fair to the Petitioner, Dr. Abdul Basir, who earned more votes,” said legal counsel Mohammad Sonhaji Akbar before Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra and Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and Asrul Sani at the preliminary hearing for case No. 58/PUU-XXII/2024 on Thursday, July 11, 2024 in the plenary courtroom.
The Petitioner asserted that the article, which reads “In allocating seats for Provincial DPRD and Regency/City DPRD members, the valid votes collected by every contesting political party shall be divided by the electoral divisor number 1, followed by other odd numbers in order, which are 3, 5, 7, and so on,” was contrary to the principle of popular sovereignty as stated in Article 1 paragraph (2) of the 1945, which should be implemented through general elections where elected candidates are determined based on the most votes, not based on party votes divided by odd numbers, or the Sainte-Laguë method.
Author : Mimi Kartika
Editor : N. Rosi
PR : Raisa Ayuditha Marsaulina
Translator : Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)
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.
Tuesday, August 20, 2024 | 18:42 WIB 57