The Petitioner's legal counsel, Azam Prasojo Kadar, delivering a revised petition for judicial review of Law Number 10 of 2016 on the Second Amendment to Law Number 1 of 2015 on the Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents and Mayors into Law (Regional Election Law), in the Constitutional Court Panel hearing room, Monday (18/11/2024). Photo by MKRI/Panji.

---

JAKARTA, MKRI - The Constitutional Court held another hearing on the judicial review of Law Number 10 of 2016 on the Second Amendment to Law Number 1 of 2015 on the Stipulation of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law Number 1 of 2014 on the Election of Governors, Regents and Mayors into Law (Regional Election Law) against the 1945 Constitution, on Monday, November 18, 2024. The agenda of the hearing was to examine the revised petition for Case Number 154/PUU-XXII/2024 submitted by Edi Iswadi, a village head of Bojongsari, District Alian, Kebumen Regency, Central Java Province.

In a hearing led by Chief Justice Suhartoyo, Azam Prasojo Kadar, as the Petitioner's legal counsel, said that he had improved the legal standing of the Petitioner by outlining constitutional losses that were specific, particular, and actual, or at least according to reasonable reasoning could certainly occur. “In essence, the causal relationship,” he said.

In addition, his party has also included a subsection on the Petitioner's petition not ne bis in idem. “That the Court has decided on material judicial review in which there are legal considerations related to the petition that are not ne bis in idem as outlined in Constitutional Court Decision Number 23/PUU-XIX/2021,” he explained.

Also read: Leave Rules for Incumbent Regional Head Candidates Challenged

In the preliminary hearing, the petitioner’s legal counsel, Sulthoni, stated that the regulation on leaves “during the campaign period” for incumbent regional head candidates does not conform with the principles of morality and rationality.

From the perspective of justice, the petitioner felt that the leave regulation, which is limited to the campaign period, caused unacceptable injustice, both as a village head and a voter. As a village head, the Petitioner felt that he was potentially affected by abuse of power and conflict of interest, where the incumbent candidate may potentially intervene to secure the contestation. As a voter, the petitioner hoped for an honest, free, and just, free of influence or intervention from the incumbent, as guaranteed in Article 22E paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Moreover, the Petitioner emphasized that Article 70 paragraph (3) of the Regional Election Law contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia because it violates the petitioner’s constitutional rights as stipulated in Article 22E paragraph (1) and Article 28J paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia.

In the petitum, the petitioner requests the Court to declare Article 17 paragraph (3) of the Regional Election Law contradicts the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia conditionally (conditionally constitutional) and does not have legally binding force as long as it does not interpret as reads, “Governors and Deputy Governors, Regents and Deputy Regents, Mayors, and Deputy Mayors who run for re-election in the same region must fulfill the provision to undergo leave outside the state’s responsibility and are prohibited from using facilities related to their positions.”

Author: Utami Argawati.

Editor: N. Rosi

PR: Fauzan F.

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 prevails.

---