Court Spots Incumbent’s Involvement in Mahakam Ulu Regent Election

Constitutional Justice guiding the oath of the Experts for the parties before testifying at the evidentiary hearing for Case No. 224/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 on the 2024 Mahakam Ulu regent election results dispute in the plenary courtroom, Tuesday (2/11/2025). Photo by MKRI/Teguh

JAKARTA (MKRI) – The evidentiary hearing for case No. 224/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 on the 2024 Mahakam Ulu regent election results dispute highlighted the incumbent regent’s involvement, who is also a biological father of regent candidate 3 Owena Mayang. Deputy Chief Justice Saldi Isra (panel chair), Constitutional Justice Arsul Sani, and Ridwan Mansyur presided over the evidentiary hearing on Tuesday, February 11, 2025.

The Petitioners, Candidate Pair 2, Novita Bulan and Artya Fathra Marthin, presented Novianus A. Batoo, the Head of the Village-Owned Enterprise (BUMK) of Long Penaneh I, as a witness to testify regarding the incumbent regent’s involvement. In his statement, Batoo revealed that during the "Acceleration of BUMK Human Resource Capacity in the Indonesia-Malaysia Border Region" event on August 22, 2024, the incumbent regent, after the event had concluded, urged the participants to support his daughter in the Mahakam Ulu regent election.

"After the event ended, the incumbent left the venue, Your Honor. I saw him shaking hands and greeting the participants. When we returned to our accommodation, traveling from The Rich to Orchid, one of the dignitaries or attendees who had been at the event told me, 'Later, in the election, support my daughter’s candidacy,'" said Batoo.

He further revealed that during his speech in the additional session, the incumbent stated that his program would continue. Although he did not explicitly mention his daughter by name, Batoo believed this was a form of the incumbent’s involvement aimed at securing a victory for Candidate Pair 3.

"During the registration, when it was finished, his daughter registered, Your Honor, as a prospective regent candidate for Mahakam Ulu," said Batoo after being asked by the Deputy Chief Justice regarding the source of his knowledge that the incumbent’s speech was a form of support for the incumbent’s daughter.

To support their argument, the Petitioners presented Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo as the expert. In his statement, Bambang explained that the 2024 Mahakam Ulu regent election had been harmed by serious violations committed by several officials, including the incumbent’s involvement.

“That the incumbent regent’s action that gathering village apparatus in Yogyakarta, [his] requests to support for his daughter who runs for the office also contradicts with Article 71 paragraph (1) and (3) that State Officials, Regional Officials, State Civil Apparatus Officials, Soldier/Police Members, and Village Heads or other titles are prohibited from making decisions or taking actions that favor or harm one of the candidate pairs,” asserted Bambang.

He also mentioned that it was pursued further by Bawaslu (election supervisory body) by following up on the report and making a decision that was forwarded as an election crime through the Gakkumdu (Integrated Law Enforcement) and the person concerned summoned. However, due to the time limit, the report was deemed expired, so it was not continued to the next stage.

"The law enforcement process has been attempted but is hampered by the process, among others, caused by the timeline stipulated in the election law itself," said Bambang.

Therefore, he believed that the Petitioners’ right to a fair election was harmed due to such serious violations. Moreover, there was no appropriate punishment for the doer. Therefore, he testified in essence, the Court should decide whether the 2024 Mahakam Ulu regent election has met the standard of election integrity.

"The Constitutional Court is not a court for enforcing criminal election law following the duties of each criminal court, other responsible instruments. In this case, the Court needs to assess and decide whether the election process that is full of violations without being sanctioned can still be said as a fair and just election, whether it still meets the standards of election integrity when law enforcement is not carried out by responsible parties and responsible parties cannot be accounted for their actions," said Bambang.

Not Part of Court’s Authority

Meanwhile, the Mahakam Ulu KPU (Elections Commission) as the Respondent presented Fajlurrahman as the expert. In his statement, Fajlur argued that such a dispute should have been solved in the related institution.

"For instance, if it is a code of ethics violation, the case is forwarded to Bawaslu and then to the Election Organizer Ethics Council (DKPP). If it involves an election administration violation, it is handled by the KPU. If it is an election dispute, Bawaslu is responsible for resolving it. And if it constitutes a criminal offense, it falls under the jurisdiction of the police," said Fajlur.

Fajlur also responded to the Petitioners' argument, which urged the Court to adopt a progressive interpretation of Article 71, paragraphs (3) and (5), concerning the disqualification of incumbent candidates who violate Law 10/2016. In his statement, he urged the Court to reject this argument, asserting that the Petitioners' intent was to have Candidate Pair 3 disqualified solely based on their biological relationship with the incumbent.

"Through the wisdom, prudence, and intellectual depth of Your Honor, may this petition be ignored because it will equate two different subjects and will disrupt legal certainty. Even in theology, Your Honor, there is no inherited sin, the sins of children cannot be inherited to parents," said Fajlur.

Bawaslu is the Only Way

Meanwhile, Candidate Pair 3 Owena Mayang Shari-Stanislaus Liah as the Relevant Party presented Muhammad as an expert. In his statement, Muhammad explained that under Bawaslu Regulation No. 9/2024, Bawaslu serves as the sole place for people or complainants to submit complaints. Therefore, he argued that no other way, including criminal proceedings, are applicable.

"Talking about election violations, they should only be addressed through Bawaslu," asserted Muhammad.

Muhammad then pointed out the Petitioners’ argument that they focused on alleged violations by the incumbent while neglecting to question any alleged violations by the candidate pair–was odd. Furthermore, he stated that, according to Bawaslu's official statement, all reports submitted by the Petitioners and other complainants had been processed as per the regulations, concluding that none of them was election-related criminal violations.

Muhammad further stated that “I think it is unfair if the legal burden is directed at a candidate pair who did not commit any violations".

He also argued that under the existing evidence and facts, no proof that the Relevant Party mobilized the incumbent during their campaign. The incumbent’s involvement was solely his initiative by first applying campaign permits as per the provision.

News

Court Spots Incumbent’s Involvement in Mahakam Ulu Regent Election