Deddi Fasmadhy Satiadharmanto (Petitioner) conveying the petition’s revisions at a judicial review hearing of the Regional Election Law, Tuesday (10/8/2024). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another material judicial review hearing of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Second Amendment to Law No. 1 of 2015 on the Stipulation of the Government Regulation in Lieu of Law No. 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors into Law (Pilkada Law) on Tuesday, October 8, 2024 in a panel courtroom. The petition revision hearing was for case No. 123/PUU-XXII/2024, filed by Deddi Fasmadhy Satiadharmanto, an Indonesian citizen harmed by the enforcement of Article 48 paragraph (4) of the Pilkada Law.

Before Chief Justice Suhartoyo and the other eight constitutional justices, the Petitioner, who appeared without any legal counsel, stated that he had revised the petition based on the justices’ advice from the previous hearing. “In the initial petition, [I challenged] two [norms], Article 48 paragraphs (4) and (5) of Law No. 10 of 2016. After receiving instruction from the Honorable Justice, [I] revised the petition to focus on only Article 48 paragraph (4),” he said.

He also submitted hardcopy and softcopy of the evidence. “To [support my] legal standing, I attached form P-7 as a voter,” he explained.

Also read: Petitioner Argues Regional Election Law Discriminates Independent Candidates

At the preliminary hearing on Monday, September 23, the Petitioner questioned Article 48 paragraph (4) of the Pilkada Law, which stipulates that the provincial or regency/city General Elections Commission (KPU), with the help of independent candidate pairs or the team given power of attorney, must submit the document proving endorsement to the polling committee (PPS) to be factually verified no later than 28 days before the candidate registration starts. This factual verification must be completed within 14 days after the document was submitted to the PPS.

He argued that the provisions have harmed independent candidates and could reduce voter turnout as eligible voters might feel that they are not presented with decent options. He argued that these provisions are in violation of Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, which guarantees equality before the law. He also argued that the limited time limit for factual verification may cause discrimination against independent candidates compared to party-backed candidates, who may have more resources and support. In addition, the disharmony between the factual verification and the candidate registration schedule also impacts legal certainty and fairness in the election, especially for independent candidates in seeking support.

Therefore, in his petitum, he requested that leeway be given for the registration of independent candidates. He requested that the Court declare Article 48 paragraph (4) of the Pilkada Law to have no binding legal force with all its legal consequences. 

Author         : Utami Argawati
Editor          : N. Rosi
PR              : Fauzan F.
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.

---