M. Syaiful Haris (fourth from the right) and Himawan Estu Bagijo (third from the right) as the Respondent’s experts testifying at an evidentiary hearing for Case No. 75/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 on the Parigi Moutong regent election results dispute, Tuesday (2/11/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) – The Constitutional Court (MK) held an evidentiary hearing for the Parigi Moutong regent election results dispute on ​​Tuesday, February 11, 2025. The hearing, which took place in the plenary courtroom, was held to examine testimonies from witnesses and experts for Case No. 75/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025, filed by Candidate Pair 03 M. Nizar Rahmatu and Ardi.

At the hearing, the Petitioners presented Abdullah as an expert, who emphasized the alleged structured, systematic, and massive (TSM) violations that, in his view, had influenced the election results. He asserted that the results announced by the Parigi Moutong Regency Elections Commission (KPU) must adhere to applicable legal provisions.

He also stressed the importance of adhering to the five-year grace period for regent candidates with prior felony conviction. He clarified that this period should be calculated from the moment the court’s verdict with permanent legal force is read out.

“The reduction of the sentence during the investigation or prosecution process is a technical aspect in sentencing and does not affect the statutory grace period,” he said.

Abdullah stated that the Parigi Moutong Regency KPU Decree No. 1450 of 2024, which certified regent-vice regent candidates on September 22, 2024, was procedurally correct. He asserted that the decree was legally valid as it did not violate Article 7 paragraph 2 letter g of the Election Law. However, he criticized the Parigi Moutong KPU (Respondent) for failing to file a cassation against the State Administrative Court (PTUN) ruling that had annulled the decree, arguing that this inaction constituted an abuse of authority.

“The Parigi Moutong KPU’s decision not to file a cassation to the Supreme Court on the PTUN ruling, which annulled the KPU Decree No. 1450 of 2024, could be considered arbitrary and akin to an abuse of authority,” he stressed.

In response to this, the Respondent presented M. Syaiful Aris as an expert. Syaiful denied the allegation and emphasized that the KPU’s decision not to file an appeal was in accordance with laws and regulations.

“Article 154 paragraph (2) of Law No. 10 of 2016 stipulates that election administrative disputes can be filed with the State Administrative Court only after all administrative remedies have been exhausted. Meanwhile, paragraph (1) grants the Relevant Party the discretion to file a cassation or not,” he explained.

Therefore, according to Syaiful, Article 154 paragraph (6) of Law No. 10 of 2016 grants the parties, including the Respondent, the discretion to file a cassation or not, based on rational considerations.

Himawan Estu Bagijo, another expert for the Respondent, conveyed a similar argument. He explained that the option to file a cassation primarily serves to uphold or restore the Petitioners’ constitutional rights. In the context of the State Administrative Court’s a quo decision, the regional KPU as the regional election organizer had no direct interest in pursuing an appeal. “There are no constitutional rights at stake,” Himawan emphasized.

He further stated that the decision not to file a cassation is a discretionary right, allowing for consideration of circumstances and the freedom to act or refrain from acting. Ultimately, discretion should be exercised to achieve the greatest benefit. However, he emphasized that the rationale for not filing a cassation must not contradict the KPU’s obligation to fulfill its primary duties and functions under the Regional Election Law, which requires the KPU to act in accordance with decisions issued by the State Administrative Court.

Election Process

Muhammad Rullyandi, an expert for Candidate 05 Amrullah S. Kasim Almahdaly, testified that witnesses had raised objections to the alleged violation at polling stations. Additionally, he emphasized that the utilization of the government grant program known as Dana Pokok Pikiran or POKIR must align with the regional apparatus work plan and the regional medium-term development plan. He stated that these funds should be specifically allocated during the preparation of the state budget (APBN) and must receive approval in accordance with the provisions set forth in the Minister of Home Affairs regulation.

“The POKIR fund must align with the regional apparatus work plan and the regional medium-term development plan. It must be specifically budgeted during the preparation of the state budget, approved accordingly, and adhere to the Minister of Home Affairs regulation,” he stated.

Video Evidence

The Court also heard testimony from the Petitioners’ witness Arif, the coordinator of the Petitioners’ campaign team. Arif stated that both before and after the voting process, he had received numerous videos and chats regarding alleged violations in several districts.

“Several reports were submitted to Bawaslu (Elections Supervisory Body) regarding village heads mobilizing the masses and using village vehicles to transport people for campaign activities,” Arif explained.

Meanwhile, Nasar, a mandate witness for the Petitioners, testified about the alleged involvement of village heads in influencing the election results. He stated that even before voting day, there were indications that village heads had attempted to steer residents’ voting preferences.

“During the voting process, we no longer found direct instructions, but there had been prior efforts to influence voters. For example, in Ongka Persatuan Village, village head Saparin warned a Family Hope Program recipient that if they did not vote for Candidate Pair 04, they would be removed from the program,” he explained.

Nasar further stated that the alleged involvement of village heads in supporting Candidate Pair 04 had become more evident after the election. “On the 28th, the day after the election, all the village heads suspected of involvement gathered at the residence of Erwin. We reported this that night, but Bawaslu initially rejected our report. After about an hour of discussion, the Mepanga Panwascam (district election supervisory committee) contacted the regency Panwas (supervisory committee), and our report was finally accepted. However, we were not informed of any follow-up after its submission,” he added.

On the other hand, the Respondent’s witness Risvirenol, who also serves as chairperson of the Central Sulawesi Provincial KPU, emphasized that the Provincial KPU’s role is limited to monitoring and receiving reports in all stages of the election conducted at the regency/city level.

“We are aware that during the registration process, Amrullah was declared ‘not meeting the requirements’ (TMS) by the Parigi Moutong Regency KPU. Amrullah further filed an objection or appeal to Bawaslu. At the provincial level, we were informed of the process but could not intervene, as the KPU’s election management operates independently,” explained Risvirenol.

Also read:

Revote Requested in Parigi Moutong: Candidate’s Legitimacy Questioned

Candidate 05 Doubted, Parigi Moutong KPU Follows Administrative Court Decree

At the preliminary examination hearing, Parigi Moutong regent-vice regent Candidate Pair 03 M. Nizar Rahmatu–Ardi filed a petition against the Parigi Moutong Regency KPU Decree No. 1850 of 2024 on the certification of the 2024 Parigi Moutong regent-vice regent election result to the Court. They argued that regent candidate 05 Amrullah S. Kasim Almahdaly had not meet the election requirements. The Petitioners argued that Amrullah S. Kasim Almahdaly’s five-year waiting period began after the Supreme Court’s appeal decision, as he faced criminal charges. Consequently, his eligibility requirements were not met during the candidate registration period on August 27-29, 2024.

Article 7 paragraph (2) letter g of Law No. 10 of 2016, supported by Article 14 paragraph (2) letter f and Article 17 of the KPU Regulation No. 10 of 2024, requires a five-year waiting period for former convicts before they can run for regional heads. Despite these provisions, the Parigi Moutong KPU still announced the candidate pair in the election.

Author              : Utami Argawati
Editor                : Lulu Anjarsari P.
PR                    : Tiara Agustina
Translator         : Nazila Rikhusshuba/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.

---