The Respondent’s legal counsel Andi Jaya Adiputra delivering a response at the hearing for Case No. 306/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 regarding the dispute of the 2024 Tolikara regent election results, Friday (1/24/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.
JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Tolikara Regency KPU (Elections Commission) as Respondent has carried out the recapitulation of vote counting results in six districts at the regency level for the 2024 Tolikara regent election: Aweku, Air Garam, Wugi, Kembu, Yuneri, and Nunggawi. The recapitulation process began on November 30 until to December 6, 2024 at the Gidi Karubaga hall. However, until the predetermined schedule, the KPU only completed recapitulation in 12 districts out of a total of 24 districts. This was conveyed by their legal counsel Ahmad Tawakkal at the examination hearing for the 2024 Tolikara regent election results dispute Case No. 306/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025. The petition was filed by Candidate Pair Number 1 Irinus Wanimbo and Arson R. Kogoya.
The Respondent explained that the main obstacles faced were the late arrival of the district election committee (PPD) to the regency and security disturbances that occurred in the region. This situation caused delays in the recapitulation process, which forced the Respondent to request additional time until December 10, 2024, in accordance with a KPU Circular Letter. During this additional time, the KPU only managed to complete the reading and matching of vote recapitulation data from 24 districts.
Furthermore, on December 12, 2024, with due regard to security factors, the Respondent shifted the location of the vote recapitulation to Wamena, the capital of Papua Highland Province. However, until December 14, 2024, the KPU was only able to complete vote recapitulation from 33 districts.
On December 16, 2024, the Tolikara Regency KPU issued a letter instructing the PPD in the six unfinished districts to immediately complete the vote recapitulation. The effort failed to be completed by the deadline on December 16, 2024. Therefore, the recapitulation results from the six districts are considered invalid votes and are inputted in the KPU’s vote recapitulation information system (Sirekap).
The Respondent argued that this obstacle was caused by a difference in data between witnesses and the district election supervisory committee (Pandis) in the six districts, which could not be resolved in the voter data verification process. Therefore, the Respondent stated that the Petitioners’ allegation of vote manipulation was baseless and cannot be proven. The Respondent also asserted that the entire recapitulation process had been carried out in accordance with the provisions of KPU Regulation No. 18 of 2024 regarding the stages and schedule of the 2024 general election. The Tolikara Regency KPU believes all steps taken had been legal and in accordance with applicable procedures, despite challenges in the field.
The Court also received testimony from Willem Wandik and Yotam Wonda (Relevant Party). Their legal counsel Alberth E. Rumbekwan firmly rejected the Petitioners’ arguments presented in the revised petition. In the petition, the Petitioners stated that the implementation of the recapitulation of election results scheduled in KPU Regulation (PKPU) No. 2 of 2024 had been delayed due to claims of vote acquisition from each candidate pair. As a result of this claim, the plenary recapitulation in six districts could not be carried out as scheduled, so the Respondent set up an additional time until December 16, 2024.
However, despite being given additional time, the six districts had failed to enter the vote recapitulation results into Sirekap, causing the votes in those districts to be declared invalid. Despite losing 15,643 votes from the six districts, the Relevant Party asserted that this did not affect the results of vote recapitulation in the other 40 districts that had been valid and properly recorded in the system.
Based on these arguments, the Relevant Party requested that the Court reject the Petitioners’ petition and maintain the results of the valid vote recapitulation in 40 districts of Tolikara Regency.
The Tolikara Regency Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Body) said it had made preventive efforts to avoid potential conflicts in the 2024 regional election, by issuing a letter dated November 20, 2024. The letter contains an appeal to the Tolikara Regency KPU regarding the certification minutes and the district D- result forms before the distribution of simultaneous election logistics and the Sirekap application. However, until today, the Tolikara Regency KPU has not followed up on Bawaslu’s letter.
“Based on these findings, Bawaslu forwarded a recommendation to the Tolikara Regency KPU through a recommendation issued on December 9, 2024,” explained the Tolikara Bawaslu representative Busiri Payokwa.
Then, in their written statement, the Tolikara Regency Bawaslu continued to supervise the implementation of the follow-up by the KPU in the regency-level recapitulation process, but the recommendations given by Bawaslu were not followed up. In further findings, the Tolikara Regency Bawaslu found alleged administrative violations related to the failure to implement of vote counting recapitulation at the regency level in several districts: Nunggawi, Aweku, Kembu, Yuneri, and Air Garam. Based on the initial study, Bawaslu recommended a recapitulation of the vote count at all polling stations in the 2024 Tolikara regent election, including in the six districts.
Read also: Wanimbo-Kogoya Challenge Tolikara Election Results, Alleging Improper Recapitulation
Candidate Pair Number 1 Irinus Wanimbo and Arson R. Kogoya accused the KPU of taking actions that were not in accordance with procedures, thus potentially harming the Petitioners’ acquisition of votes.
The Petitioners explained that the district-level vote recapitulation process in six districts, specifically Wugi, Aweku, Kembu, Nunggawi, Air Garam, and Yuneri, had not been completed. The Respondent allegedly ordered the district election committee (PPD) to move the recapitulation location to the Tolikara Regency KPU office without a clear legal basis. The Petitioners believe this action have resulted in the loss of some of their votes. Based on Article 16 paragraph (5) of KPU Regulation No. 18 of 2024, the transfer of the recapitulation location can only be done if there are certain conditions and it must be accompanied by a KPU decree. However, in this case, the transfer was carried out without a clear legal basis.
The Petitioners also revealed that in the recapitulation process led by the Respondent, the PPD was not given the opportunity to verify the data in the district D-result-KWK forms as stipulated in Article 30 paragraph (6) letter h of KPU Regulation No. 18 of 2024. As a result, the results of votes that had not been verified at the plenary meeting at the district level were immediately recognized by the Respondent as official results without going through the proper verification process.
The Petitioners requested the Court to cancel the vote recapitulation results certified by the Respondent and order a re-recapitulation in accordance with the mechanisms regulated in the laws and regulations. The hearing will continue with further examination of evidence and witnesses filed by both parties.
Author : Utami Argawati
Editor : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR : Tiara Agustina
Translator : Dinita Aktivia/Yuniar Widiastuti (NL) (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.
Friday, January 24, 2025 | 17:28 WIB 164