The Petitioners’ legal counsel Denny Alan Pakiding at the ruling hearing for case No. 8194/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 on the 2024 X Dogiyai regent election results dispute, Wednesday (2/5/2025). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) asserted that the collective agreement made by the tribal chiefs in five districts in Dogiyai Regency on voting day remains unjustified. Such an agreement undermines the purity of voters’ votes where the noken* system applies. Even if it could be justified, in order to maintain the purity votes, the vote acquisition of the pairs of candidates in the Dogiyai Regency election should be the basis. Such was the Court’s legal consideration read out by Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh at the ruling hearing on the dispute over the 2024 Dogiyai regent election results on Wednesday, February 5, 2025.

The Court was of the opinion that the argument of Candidate Number 03 Otopianus P. Tebai and Angkian Goo (Petitioners) that the Dogiyai Regency KPU (Elections Commission) as Respondent had not followed the agreement of the tribal chiefs in those 5 districts (South Sukikai, Piyaiye, Central Mapia, West Mapia, and Mapia) to change the vote results as the agreement was made, has no basis in law. Because the Respondent was prohibited from changing the election results at the polling station level up until the next level, as stated in the KPU Regulation No. 1774 of 2024. Although the changes in the vote results in question were made by mutual agreement, however, due to the requirement to provide support to one candidate pair if one of the three candidate pairs gets the highest votes, this cannot be justified.

Insufficient Evidence

Meanwhile, in relation to the Petitioners’ claim of intimidation and pressure on the community to accept the results of the vote transfer from the Petitioners to the Relevant Party (Candidate Number 02 Yudas Tebai-Yuliten Anauw), the Petitioners did not file evidence to support its argument. The Court was of the opinion that the Petitioners did not elaborate on the findings or recommendations of the Dogiyai Regency Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Body) regarding the issue, so the Petitioners’ argument did not convince the Court.

“The Court is convinced that the stages of the 2024 Dogiyai regent election have been conducted in accordance with the stages and provisions and related problems have been resolved in accordance with the provisions and laws and regulations. Moreover, there are no ‘special conditions/events’ found in this case,” said Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh.

Petition Inadmisssible

The difference in votes between the Petitioners and the winning candidate was as follows: the Petitioners received 9,618 votes, while the Relevant Party secured 41,900 votes. Consequently, the difference in their vote acquisition is 32,282 votes (41,900 - 9,618), or 33.60 percent. Thus, continued Justice Foekh, the Court was of the opinion that although the Petitioners were a candidate pair in the 2024 Dogiyai regent election, they did not fulfill the provisions for filing a petition as referred to in Article 158 paragraph (2) letter a of Law No. 10 of 2016. Therefore, according to the Court, they do not have legal standing to file the petition.

“[The Court] adjudicated, on the exception: to grant the Respondent’s and the Relevant Party’s exceptions regarding the Petitioners’ legal standing, to reject the Respondent’s and the Relevant Party’s exceptions for the remainder; on the petition’s subject matter: to declare the Petitioners’ petition inadmissible,” said Chief Justice Suhartoyo while reading out the Decision No. 194/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025.

Also read:

Vote Shift Suspected in Five Districts in Dogiyai

Dogiyai Regency KPU Follows Election Regulations, Not Tribe Agreements

At the preliminary hearing on January 16, 2025, the Petitioners requested the annulment of the Dogiyai KPU Decree No. 701 of 2024 on the certification of the 2024 Dogiyai regent-vice regent election results. The Petitioners alleged election violations in five districts: Mapia, Central Mapia, West Mapia, Piyaiye, and South Sukikai, including a shift of votes or support to Candidate Pair 2 Yudas Tebai-Yuliten Anauw from the great elder of Mee tribe, Simapitowa/Tota Mapiha group, whose authority encompasses the five districts.

The collective agreement was made by the tribe elder whose authority covers five districts that had 31,115 votes, which were intended to be directed to Candidate Pairs 1, 3, or 6. The agreement stated that among the three, the pair acquiring the most votes in the valley region of Kamu, South Kamu, East Kamu, North Kamu, and Dogiyai Districts would be promised votes from Simapitowa group. In the end, Candidate Pair 3 obtained 7,174 votes—the highest compared to Candidate Pair 1 with 4,398 and Candidate Pair 6 with 5,695 votes—and should earn the 31,115 votes from Simatipowa. However, the KPU (Respondent) ignored the agreement and shifted the votes to Candidate Pair 2.

(*) The noken voting system is carried out by communities in Papua, either through public agreement on vote allocation or through the delegation of votes to a tribal leader.

Author               : Sri Pujianti
Editor                : N. Rosi
Translator         : Dinita Aktivia/Yuniar Widiastuti (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.

---