Legal counsels Yuniar Riza Hakiki and Alan F.G Wardhana conveying the petition’s revisions at a judicial review hearing of the Regional Election Law, Thursday (10/17/2024). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held another material judicial review hearing of 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 Thursday, October 17, 2024 in a panel courtroom. The petition revision hearing was for case No. 137/PUU-XXII/2024, filed by Satrio Anggito Abimanyu and ten other students of the Islamic University of Indonesia (UII), who are eligible voters in their respective hometowns.

Legal counsel Yuniar Riza Hakiki stated that at the preliminary hearing, Constitutional Justice Asrul Sani had advised the Petitioners to add Law No. 10 of 2016.

“On the subject [of the case] and the object of the petition, we have mentioned it, since the object of the petition filed concerns the correlation between Law No. 1 of 2015 and Law No. 10 of 2016,” he said.

He added that on the elaboration of the Court’s authority on page 6, the object of the petition is not only the articles, i.e. Article 62 paragraph (1) and Article 95 paragraph (2), but also the elucidation to those articles.

“We believe the elucidation to those articles is not sufficiently clear, especially the phrases ‘at another location’ and ‘at another polling station’ are unclear. Meanwhile, it only states that Article 62 paragraph (1) and Article 95 paragraph (2) are sufficiently clear. Therefore, we request in the petitum that the elucidation is also reviewed,” Yuniar said before Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah and members of the panel.

To strengthen the Petitioners’ legal standing, a piece of evidence had been added to explain that in the 2020 regional election they were not eligible to vote yet due to their age, but in 2024 they are now eligible to vote in the election. “We have added the revision on page 21 point 17,” Yuniar added.

In the petitum, the Petitioners request that the Court declare the phrase “at another location” in Article 62 paragraph (1) of Law No. 10 of 2016 conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted “include outside of one’s province and/or regency/city through electronic voting equipment as referred to in Article 85 paragraph (1) letter b, or through proxy voting.”

Also read: Students Argue Poll-Relocation Ambiguity Threatens Relocating Voters

At the preliminary hearing on Friday, October 4, the Petitioners argued that their constitutionals right protected under Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution had been harmed by the enforcement of Article 62 paragraph (1) in conjunction with Article 95 paragraph (2) of Law No. 1 of 2015. The phrase “at another location” and “at another polling station” in those provisions do not provide a clear explanation on the relocation of voting location, especially for relocating voters. As a result, the Petitioners, who are currently studying outside of their hometowns, could potentially lose their right to vote in the regional election on November 27 this year.

They believe they are in “a certain condition” as stated in Article 50 of PKPU No. 7 of 2024, since they cannot vote at their original polling stations while studying outside of their original domiciles. However, there are no provisions specifically accommodating relocating voters, so they could potentially be unable to vote.

Therefore, the Petitioners asked the Court to prioritize their petition in order to protect their constitutional rights and prevent constitutional impairment. They also requested that the Court declare the phrase “at another location” in Article 62 paragraph (1) of Law No. 1 of 2015 conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “outside of the province of origin and/or regency/city of origin” and the phrase “at another polling station” in Article 95 paragraph (2) of Law No. 1 of 2015 conditionally unconstitutional and not legally binding if not interpreted as “at a polling station outside of the province of origin and/or regency/city of origin.”

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

---