Court Highlights Allegations of KPU Taliabu Ignoring Revote Recommendation

Aswanto (left) and Bambang Eka C. Widodo the Petitioners’ experts at the evidentiary hearing to hear the testimony of Witnesses/Experts in Case No. 267/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 disputing the 2024 Taliabu Island regent election results. Photo by MKRI/Ifa

JAKARTA, MKRI - The Constitutional Court held evidentiary hearing on the 2024 Taliabu Island regent election results dispute on Friday, February 14, 2025. The third hearing for Case No. 267/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 filed by Candidate Number 02 Citra Puspasari Mus and La Utu Ahmadi (Petitioners) was scheduled to hear witness and expert testimony, as well as to examine and validate additional evidence.

The hearing was presided over by Chief Justice Suhartoyo accompanied by two members, Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and Constitutional Justice M. Guntur Hamzah. In the hearing, the Petitioners presented Aswanto and Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo as Petitioners’ experts, Moch. Fachtoni Idris and Ishalik as Petitioners’ witnesses. The Relevant Party (Candidate Number 01 Sashabila Widya L. Mus-La O de Yasir) presented witnesses Kisman Djannu, La Ade, and Rajiju Umawaitina, Sultan Alwan (Expert). The Respondent (KPU Taliabu Island Regency) presented expert, Rudhi Acshoni, and witnesses, Nur Hidayat Sardini, Sufardioni Anifi, and Sumardin La Maniu.

Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo explained the mechanism for implementing a revote (PSU) recommendation submitted by the Regency Bawaslu to the Taliabu Island Regency KPU. He emphasized that, under General Elections Commission Regulation (PKPU) No. 15/2024, the KPU is obligated to act on Bawaslu’s recommendations. Each recommendation must be followed up through a legal review or study, followed by a plenary meeting to determine a final decision.

However, the issue at hand is that, despite the recommendation from Bawaslu, the Respondent remains uncertain about proceeding with a revote, as only a single violation was identified. Bambang further explained that, according to Bawaslu’s circular letter, regional head elections fall under the same electoral framework as general elections.

Then there are also issues regarding the voters who are not registered in the polling station but have used the right to vote. Bambang considered that it was necessary for voters who vote outside their domicile to possess a letter confirming voting relocation as a requirement in order to vote at the intended transfer polling station.

Bambang stated that the issue arises when voters use their ID card according to their domicile, but the polling station working committee (KPPS) is still required to verify the final voters list (DPT) at the polling station. This verification ensures that voters who have moved and are exercising their voting rights outside their registered location are, in fact, listed in the DPT or at another polling station. He explained that a voter’s ID may indicate one location, while their registration might be at a different polling station. In such cases, the local polling station may deny them the right to vote. Conversely, a voter might exercise their voting rights at the polling station where they are now registered. This, however, poses a problem because if the DPT is not checked online, the KPU regulation could inadvertently allow multiple voting.

Legitimate Ballot Inconsistency

Bambang gave his views on valid and invalid votes. The problem with valid and invalid votes is the inconsistency in determining whether the votes are valid or not, especially considering the amount of voting marks that are considered invalid votes. As a result, there was a debate on the status of valid and invalid votes. “It should refer to General Elections Commission Regulation (PKPU) so that different interpretations do not arise, leading to a diversity of decisions on valid and invalid votes,” argued Bambang.

The Petitioners’ Expert, Aswanto, also emphasized Bawaslu's recommendation to the Taliabu Island Regency KPU in order to conduct a re-vote at several polling stations. However, the KPU did not implement it.

“Ignoring this [Bawaslu] recommendation is a real form of defiance of the Election Law and it is the authority of the Constitutional Court to make corrections,” Aswanto argues.

Reports from the Polling Station

Moch. Fachtoni Idris the Campaign Team Candidate Number 02 reported that after the implementation of the election, it was discovered that there were voters who voted using ID cards not in their domicile. Fachtoni recognized that the electoral area was far away in an underdeveloped region, so it took several days to confirm the alleged violations.

“By meeting witnesses in the field, it was discovered that there were 20 polling stations where these violations occurred, there were also 5 polling stations that could not be verified because of incomplete data. So there were only 15 that we reported to Bawaslu and Bawaslu could only verify 12 polling stations. Then from the revote recommendation by Bawaslu, only 1 polling station can be implemented, the remaining 11 are not implemented by the KPU. Our report was filed on December 3, 2024, recapitulation was carried out on December 5-7, 2024, and recommendations were issued on December 5, 6 and above 10, 2024,” Fachtoni reported.

Ishalik, candidate number 02’ mandated witness reported that he documented the attendance list at polling station 01 in Lede Village. There was also a report that there were 3 voters who were not entitled to exercise their voting rights at the polling station.

Revote Limitation

Sultan Alwan the Relevant Party’s expert confirmed that the revote can only be conducted 10 days after the election. Meanwhile, this alleged violation has exceeded 10 days.

“So this reporting is the same as imposing it on the KPU,” explained Alwan.

Rudhi Acshoni, the Respondent’s expert, mentioned Bawaslu Regulation 9/2024 concerning the handling of election violations. The recommendation filed by Bawaslu (revote) must be followed up 7 days after the recommendation was received. Article 4 paragraph (3) PKPU 15/2024 stated that in following up on recommendations, it is necessary to conduct a legal review. This means that it must pay attention to the fulfillment of the elements and in the context of this case, the KPU has procedurally fulfilled these provisions.

“But it [the recommendation] needs to be observed again, the revote has a maximum application limitation, which is 10 days after voting. While the recommendation from Bawaslu is two days before the last day, specifically the 8th day,[suddenly] there was a recommendation filed on the 8th night. So that the next day has entered the 9th day and there is only one day left,” stated Rudhi.

News

Court Highlights Allegations of KPU Taliabu Ignoring Revote Recommendation