The petitioner's legal counsel Said Kemal Zulfi attending the Decision Pronouncement Hearing of material judicial review of Law Number 10 of 2016 on Regional Head Election Thursday (14/11) at the Courtroom. Photo by MKRI/Ifa.
JAKARTA, MKRI - The Constitutional Court ruled that Case Number 127/PUU-XXII/2024 regarding the judicial review of articles in Law Number 10/2016 on the Election of Governors, Regents and Mayors (Regional Election Law) cannot be accepted. According to the Court, the Petitioners' petition regarding the norms of Article 109 paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) of the Regional Elections Law is unclear or obscure.
“The Court is of the opinion that because of the posita and petitum of the Petitioners, the norms of Article 109 paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) of Law Number 10 of 2016 are unclear, thus making the petition a quo unclear or obscure (obscuur),” said Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra in the decision pronouncement hearing on Thursday, November 14, 2024, in the Plenary Courtroom.
Article 109 paragraph (1) of the Regional Election Law reads, “The pair of Candidates for Governor and Deputy Governor who receives the most votes is determined as the elected pair of Candidates for Governor and Deputy Governor.” Article 109 paragraph (3) of the Election Law reads, “In the event that there is only 1 (one) pair of Candidates for Governor and Deputy Governor participating in the Election obtaining more than 50% (fifty percent) of the valid votes, they are determined as the elected pair of Candidates for Governor and Deputy Governor.”
Justice Saldi said the Petitioners had not fully and clearly outlined the conflict between the norms being tested for constitutionality and the basis of the test used. The Court did not find a clear and adequate description of legal arguments in the posita section regarding the reasons why Article 109 paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) of the Regional Elections Law should be interpreted as the Petitioners' petition. In their petition, the Petitioners request that the norm provisions of Article 109 paragraph (1) of the Regional Elections Law be interpreted as “including having to defeat an empty box” and Article 109 paragraph (3) of the Regional Elections Law be interpreted as “including counting the empty box votes as valid votes”.
“In this regard, the contradiction between the norms in question and the articles that are the basis for testing in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia is not described. So that the arguments of the Petitioners do not have a basis for argumentation in the posita,” Justice Saldi said.
In addition to Article 109 paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) of the Regional Elections Law, the Petitioners also filed a petitum requesting a new meaning for Article 54C paragraph (2), Article 54D paragraph (1), Article 54D paragraph (2), and Article 54D paragraph (3) of the Regional Elections Law. In essence, the Petitioners want the empty box/empty column option to also apply to elections that are followed by more than one pair of regional head candidates.
However, the Petitioners' request along these articles has lost its object. This is because Article 54C paragraph (2) of Law Number 10 of 2016 has been conditionally interpreted in Constitutional Court Decision Number 126/PUU-XXII/2024 which was previously pronounced earlier today. Therefore, according to the Court, it is no longer relevant to consider the arguments of the Petitioners a quo which rely on the norms of Article 54C paragraph (2) of Law Number 10 of 2016 which have been declared contrary to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia and do not have conditional binding legal force.
“Thus, the Petitioners' arguments regarding Article 54D paragraph (1) and paragraph (2) of Law Number 10 of 2016 must also be declared to have lost their object,” Justice Saldi said.
This case was requested by three Jakarta residents who wanted an empty box option even though there were more than one pair of regional head candidates in the election. According to them, the choice of candidate pairs for regional heads in the 2024 elections is not in accordance with the Petitioners' wishes. Therefore, the Petitioners filed a petition to review Article 54C paragraph (2) and Article 54D paragraph (3) of the Regional Election Law.
The norm of the article regulates the display of an empty column with no picture for elections in which only one candidate pair participates. Meanwhile, the Petitioners want the provision of an empty column or better known as an empty box to also apply to elections that are followed by more than one candidate pair. The determination of a candidate pair in the election of more than one candidate pair is carried out if the elected candidate pair obtains the highest votes, including having to defeat an empty column.
Also read:
Students Argue Poll-Relocation Ambiguity Threatens Relocating Voters
UII Students Revise Petition Against Regional Election Law
Single-candidate election ballot design changes and takes effect in 2029
The Constitutional Court partially granted the petition for judicial review of Case Number 126/PUU-XXII/2024. In its decision, the Court stated that Article 54C paragraph (2) of the Regional Election Law is contrary to the 1945 Constitution and has no conditional binding legal force as long as it is not interpreted as “The election of 1 (one) candidate pair is carried out using a ballot paper containing the name and photo of the candidate pair and 2 (two) blank columns at the bottom containing/with options to express ‘agree’ or ‘disagree’ with 1 (one) Candidate Pair for Governor and Deputy Governor, Regent and Deputy Regent, or Mayor and Deputy Mayor”.
Subsequently, the Court stated that Article 54D paragraph (3) of the Regional Election Law is contrary to the 1945 Constitution and has no conditional binding legal force as long as it is not interpreted as “The next election shall be held within a maximum period of 1 (one) year from the day of the voting, and the regional head/deputy regional head elected based on the results of the next election shall hold office until the inauguration of the regional head and deputy regional head resulting from the next simultaneous election, as long as it does not exceed a period of 5 (five) years from the inauguration.” (*)
Author: Utami Argawati
Editor: Lulu Anjarsari
PR: Fauzan Febriyan
Translator: Rizky Kurnia Chaesario
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, November 14, 2024 | 15:41 WIB 81