Fahmi Nugroho (middle) and Nazarudin (right), the Petitioners’ legal counsels at the preliminary hearing of Empat Lawang regent election results dispute, Thursday (1/9/2025). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Candidate Pair Budi Antoni Al Jufri and Henny Verawati (Petitioners) questioned the length office term in the preliminary hearing of the regent election results dispute on Thursday, January 9, 2025 on panel 2 courtroom of the Constitutional Court (MK). Legal counsels Fahmi Nugroho and Nazaruddin represented the Petitioners in the hearing for Case Number 24/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 presided over by Chief Justice Suhartoyo (panel chair) and Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah.

The case positioned the General Elections Commission (KPU) of Empat Lawang as the Respondent and the 2024 regent and deputy regent Joncik Muhammad and Arifai as the Relevant Parties.

In their petitums, Budi-Henny brought up their candidacy in the 2024 Empat Lawang regent election which was obstructed by an issue in the length of office term served by Budi as former Regent of Empat Lawang. The Petitioners claimed that there is a discrepancy between the Petitioner's version and the Respondent's version in the calculation

The Respondent argued that the term of office is calculated from the inauguration date on August 26, 2013 until the judgement is legally binding (inkracht) to the Petitioner on May 3, 2016. “By the Respondent’s calculation, [the office term] is 2 years, 8 months, and 7 days,” Fahmi explained.

On the contrary, the Petitioners argued that the office term should be calculated from inauguration until October 22, 2015, on which the deputy regent at the time was appointed as the acting regent based on the Appointment Letter issued by the Minister of Home Affairs. Thus, the length of the term, according to the Petitioners is 2 years, 1 month, and 27 days. 

It was revealed in the hearing that the Petitioners’ office ended due to a legal problem leading to his detainment in July 2015, three months before the Minister’s appointment letter. The problem in question was a corruption case that was legally binding on May 3, 2016 under a court ruling.

The panel then inquired about the Petitioner’s criminal sanction, since it pertains to the formal requirement of his candidacy. However, the Petitioners could not give an explanation yet so the panel requested it be delivered in the next hearing.

“Is the criminal sanction over 5 years?” asked Chief Justice Suhartoyo.

“No, it was less than 5 years, Your Honor,” Fahmi replied.

“[I was asking] not the time served, but the sanction of the crime proven. Please look into this and [find the answer] in case it becomes evidence in the subsequent hearing,” Suhartoyo demanded.

The panel requested the Respondent to explain the discrepancy of the Petitioner’s term of office and clarify the matter in the following hearing.

The petition for the case No. 24/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 can be accessed here.

Author : Ashri Fadilla

Editor : N. Rosi
Translator : M. Hafidh Al Mukmin / FS (RA)

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.

---