Ilham Saputra testifying as an expert for the Relevant Party at the evidentiary hearing for Case No. 73/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 on the 2024 Siak regent election results dispute, Monday (2/17/2025). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — The Constitutional Court (MK) held the evidentiary hearing for a petition on the 2024 Siak regent election results dispute on Monday, February 17, 2025. The hearing was presided by Chief Justice Suhartoyo (panel chair) and Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah.

The Case No. 73/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 was petitioned by Siak Regent Candidate Pair 3, Alfedri and Husni Merza. The Siak Elections Commission (KPU) served as the Respondent. The Siak Regency Elections Supervisory Body (Bawaslu) and Regent Candidate Pair 2 Afni Z–Syamsurizal (Relevant Party) also delivered their statements.

The Petitioners presented former constitutional justice Aswanto as an expert to highlight the violations occurring in the election. Aswanto, criminal law professor of Hasanuddin University of Makassar, cited one of the Constitutional Court decisions and a circular letter issued by Bawaslu.

Referring to Constitutional Court Decision No. 41/PHPU.D-VI/2008, Aswanto emphasized that the Court does not merely recalculate the election vote count results, but also assesses and rules the disputed vote count. He believes that a number of violations had happened in the 2024 Siak regent election.

“[Based on my] observation on the a quo petition, several violations have occurred, including violations at a number of polling stations in several districts,” he said at the hearing.

He further cited Bawaslu Circular Letter No. 117 of 2024, which stated that one violation at any polling station could warrant a revote. Hence, he believes that the Court should grant the petition, which requested a revote.

“Based on the above explanation, the Court should have no issue to grant the a quo petition,” he concluded.

The violations alleged in the Petitioners’ petition include the issues at the Tengku Rafi’an Regional Hospital (RSUD) and the housing area for workers of PT Karsa Wahana Lestari (PT KWL).

In opposition to Aswanto, I Gusti Putu Artha—an expert for the Respondent—opined that a revote should not be carried out at the two sites mentioned above. Putu argued that hospitals are not among locations requiring special polling stations, as stipulated in the General Elections Commission (KPU) Regulation No. 7 of 2024. The Respondent, Putu stated, had facilitated the voters there according to the prevailing regulations.

“Hence, the argument to recommend a revote in Tengku Rafi’an [Hospital] is refuted and does not have legal grounds since the facility had been provided for several times,” he stated.

Putu added that the Respondent had fulfilled its due service to the voters in the area of PT KWL. While many voters did not receive voting invites, that incident did not qualify for a revote.

“If some voters did not receive C-notice forms, it does not qualify for a revote,” he argued.

In general, the hearing highlighted four key issues: the disenfranchisement of 128 patients at Tengku Rafi’an Hospital, the undelivered voting invites to the workers of PT KWL, allegation of double voting by a polling station working committee (KPPS) chairperson, and allegation of KPPS members mobilizing voters inside the election booths.

Disenfranchisement at Hospital

Adi Eka Putra, a witness presented by the Petitioners, spoke as one of the officials at Tengku Rafi’an Hospital. Adi noted that there were 128 inpatients at the hospital at the time of the election. The hospital, he said, only received an inquiry from the KPPS about the patients and staff two days before election day.

“It was [November] 25th, in the afternoon, I was called by the [hospital] director [and he stated] that he had received a letter from the KPPS. The letter requested to collect data of the inpatients and staff at the hospital,” he explained.

Adi emphasized that there was no special polling station established at the hospital, making the patients unable to vote. Only one polling station sent their officers to visit inpatient voters at the hospital.

“Only officers from Rempak Village visited,” he reported.

However, the Siak Regency KPU as the Respondent argued that they had inquired about the data since November 12, 2024 through a visit to conduct coordination and information dissemination. Since the hospital could not provide definitive data, the Respondent inquired again on November 20, 2024, with no success.

“What did the hospital say?” asked Chief Justice Suhartoyo.

“The same. They couldn’t make sure [of the voters’ data],” replied Irdinansyah, the Siak district election committee (PPK) chairperson.

The highly-charged issue drew the attention of the Central KPU chairman, Mochammad Afifuddin, who was also present at the hearing. The panel requested Afifuddin to describe the polling mechanism for hospitals in general. He then explained that according to the technical guidance, KPPS members are supposed to go around hospital rooms to facilitate patients to vote one hour before the closing time.

“KPPS members were assigned at the nearby polling stations to visit [patients] using the data of voters surveyed and eligible to vote in the [hospital] rooms to let them exercise their rights to vote,” he noted.

According to Afif, way before election day, the Regency KPU had coordinated with the hospital to identify the voters. While they were not required to establish a special polling station, the Regency KPU still needed to accommodate the voting rights of the staff and the patients.

“Certainly, the effort to facilitate must absolutely be done by the KPU members,” he stated.

Undelivered Voting Invites to Workers

The Respondent also clarified the allegation of undelivered C-notice forms by presenting Saut Martogi Sianipar, the polling station committee (PPS) chairperson of Buantan Besar Village.

According to Sianipar, the C-notice forms had been initially entrusted to the chief of the working shift. However, the chief refused to deliver them and asked the workers to pick them up themselves.

“So, some of them did not want to pick them up because it was their day off [and] they were not reimbursed for the transportation,” Sianipar stated.

Out of the 59 C-notice forms entrusted to the working shift leader, only 19 were delivered. Of them, eleven voters were willing to vote on election day.

Meanwhile, the Siak Bawaslu stated that they did not receive any report related to the issue. “What the Respondent reported regarding the undelivered C6 or C-notice [forms], according to observation by the district and village supervisory committee (PKD), no violation indications were found,” said Ahmad Dardiri, coordinator of the Violation Department of the Siak Bawaslu.

Voter Mobilization by KPPS Members

At the hearing, Nelvi Susanti testified as a witness for the Petitioners. She heard from another voter at the polling station that a KPPS member had directed voters to vote for the Relevant Party behind the voting booths.

“They stated that they were followed to the voting booth and directed to vote for Candidate Pair 2 by a member of the KPPS,” she reported.

Upon hearing the account, she contacted the Petitioners’ campaign team and was then asked to record a video. The video recording was played at the hearing. Nelvi assured that the woman escorting a voter to the voting booth was a KPPS officer.

“I know the person,” Nelvi assured when the panel demanded a more convincing proof.

“I believe that you are a local. [What we ask is] something to convince the Court, this hearing,” Chief Justice Suhartoyo responded.

The Siak Regency Bawaslu assured that no election violation was found at TPS 2 of Minas Jaya, the polling station in question. Bawaslu did not receive any report related to the issue, either.

“According to the supervisory report conducted by the polling station supervisors, there was no election violation nor incident form [filed]. To date, there was no report, either,” Ahmad Dardiri stated.

Allegation of Double Voting by KPPS

One of the Petitioners’ mandate witnesses, Juprizal, testified that during the district-level plenary meeting, he heard that the KPPS chairperson of TPS 48 in Tualang District had voted twice. He then contacted the district elections supervisory committee (Panwascam), who confirmed that the incident qualified as an election violation.

“What was reported to us [by] Suwito (Panwascam member), was that the KPPS chairperson Ardianto was examined. He admitted to having voted twice,” Juprizal stated.

Meanwhile, the Respondent claimed that they had asked clarification from the person in question. They also matched the attendance list against the number of ballots used.

“During the recapitulation announcement at the polling station, there were no discrepancies or difference between the number of ballots used and the number of voters on the attendance list,” said the Tualang PPK chairperson Yulastri Maria Siska.

On the other hand, the Siak Regency Bawaslu delivered a statement that the incident was relayed to the Siak Integrated Law Enforcement (Gakkumdu). However, upon clarification and review, no elements of violation were found.

“During the first Gakkumdu meeting attended by the Prosecution and the Police, it was concluded that there were no indications of election crime due to lack of witness and evidence,” stated Ahmad Dardiri.

Also read:

Siak Regent Election: Alfredi-Husni Claim Low Voter Turnout and Polling Officials’ Focus on Taking Pictures

Siak KPU Denies Allegation of Pre-marked Ballots

At the preliminary hearing, the Petitioners argued that the low voter turnout in Siak Regency, which ranged from only 26 to 50 percent, was a result of violations committed by the Respondent. One such violation allegedly occurred at the Tengku Rafi’an Regional General Hospital (RSUD). On election day, the Petitioners revealed that the officials who had come to the hospital did not give the voters a chance to vote, but only to take pictures. The Petitioners also raised the issue of 47 voting invites that had not reached voters who worked at a company.

Based on the arguments, the Petitioners requested that the Court cancel the Siak Regency KPU Decree No. 1120 of 2024 concerning the election results certification of the 2024 Siak regent election. The Petitioners also requested that the Court order the Respondent to conduct a revote at various polling stations in Siak Regency.

Also read:

Petition for Case No. 73/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025

Statement by the Relevant Party

Response by the Respondent

Statement by Bawaslu

 

Author         : Ashri Fadilla
Editor          : N. Rosi
PR              : Fauzan F.
Translator   : M. Hafidh Al Mukmin/Yuniar Widiastuti (NL)

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.

---