Legal counsels Dani Safari Efendi and Ecep Sukmanagara at the preliminary hearing for case No. 321/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 on the 2024 Tasikmalaya regent election results dispute, Thursday (5/15/2025). Photo by MKRI/Ifa.

---

JAKARTA (MKRI) — Tasikmalaya regent-vice regent candidates number 1 Iwan Saputra and Dede Muksit Aly (Iwan-Dede) have filed for the annulment of the Tasikmalaya Regency Elections Commission (KPU) Decree No. 35 on the certification of the results of the 2024 Tasikmalaya regent-vice regent election revote, issued on April 24, 2025 at 02:19 WIB, to the Constitutional Court (MK). Chief Justice Suhartoyo and Constitutional Justices Daniel Yusmic P. Foekh and M. Guntur Hamzah sat on panel 1 on Thursday, May 15, 2025 for the preliminary hearing for case No. 321/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 on the 2024 Tasikmalaya regent election.

The Petitioners’ legal counsel Dani Safari Efendi stated that the revote of the Tasikmalaya regent election had been based on the Constitutional Court Decision No. 132/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025. The annulment of the General Elections Commission (KPU) Decree No. 1574 of 2024 on the certification of candidate pairs in the 2024 regional election, excluding only Iip Miptahul Paoz, means that all content of the decree was null and void. In addition, the candidate pairs are declared not having legal standing as candidate pairs.

In other words, the Tasikmalaya Regency KPU as Respondent had to reregister new candidate pairs by attaching B1-KWK forms along with other required documents for the revote, not only by replacing the candidates. However, on March 23, they issued Decree No. 10 of 2025 on the certification of candidate pairs in the 2024 Tasikmalaya regent election after the Constitutional Court decision on the election results dispute with regent-vice regent candidates Cecep Nurul Yakin-Asep Sopari, Iwan Saputra-Dede Muksit Aly, and Ai Diantani Ade Sugianto-lip Miptahul Paoz. The Petitioners believe the certification had not followed the procedure, been unlawful, and undermined the principle of justice.

Also read:

Cecep-Asep Question the Term of Office of Tasikmalaya Regent

Tasikmalaya Regency KPU: Ade Sugianto’s Period and Term Align with Regulations

Pros and Cons of Counting the Term of Office for Incumbent Regent Candidates in Tasikmalaya

Court Disqualifies Tasikmalaya Regent Candidate for Having Served Two Terms

Through Decision No. 132/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025, the Court ordered the Respondent to conduct a revote excluding regent candidate Ade Sugianto for a violation of Article 7 paragraph (2) letter n of Law No. 10 of 2016 on the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors. The decision also affirmed the annulment of the KPU Decrees No. 1574 of 2024 on the certification of candidate pairs and No. 1575 of 2024 on the certification of serial numbers of candidate pairs for the 2024 Tasikmalaya regent election. However, the Respondent did not implement the Court’s verdict by not canceling the decree on the certification of serial numbers of candidate pairs and for keep using the previous list of candidate pair without re-verification.

The disqualification of Ade Sugianto has led to a change in the composition of candidate pair number 3. Vice-regent candidate lip Miptahul Paoz remained, but a new regent candidate should be nominated by the political party endorsing them. The Petitioners question whether this new pair required re-registration. Article 14 paragraph (2) of the KPU Regulation No. 8 of 2024 stipulates that all candidates meet the candidacy requirements, including document verification and the requirement of less than two terms of service. For this revote, the Constitutional Court held that the regent candidate replacement “be verified according to regulations on candidacy requirements.” This means that re-verification and reregistration should take place. Without reregistration, the KPU cannot ensure that the substitute candidate has met the substantive requirements such as limit of terms of service.

Also read: Constitutional Court Decision No. 132/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025

The Petitioners have also been disadvantaged due to the unequal revote process for candidate number 2 Cecep Nurul Yakin, who is the incumbent Tasikmalaya vice regent. They alleged that said candidate had been active without taking a leave of absence for the revote.

“Candidate number 2, who is the incumbent vice regent, has used his power to influence state civil apparatus, from district heads to village heads. He has also influenced the region’s police force by summoning all district heads and heads of offices in 351 villages, and even religious figures too. We believe the democracy of the Tasikmalaya Regency revote had been harmed by the organizers,” said the Petitioners’ legal counsel Ecep Sukmanagara in the plenary courtroom.

Therefore, the Petitioners requested that the Court annul the Tasikmalaya Regency KPU Decrees No. 35 on the certification of the results of the 2024 Tasikmalaya regent-vice regent election revote following the Constitutional Court decision on the election results dispute, issued in Tasikmalaya on April 24, 2025 at 02:19 WIB; No. 10 of 2025 on the certification of candidate pairs in the 2024 Tasikmalaya regent election after the Constitutional Court decision on the election results dispute; and disqualify candidate number 2 Cecep Nurul Yakin by removing Asep Sopari Al-Ayubi; and disqualify candidate number 3 Diantani Ade Sugianto by removing Iip Miftahul Paoz.

In addition, they requested that the Court declare the Tasikmalaya Regency revote based on the official letter of the Central KPU No. 494/PL.02-SD/06/2025 on the follow-up on the Constitutional Court decision on the election results dispute unconstitutional and null and void; and order the Respondent to hold another revote, including all of its stages, following statutory legislation.

Read the petition for case No. 321/PHPU.BUP-XXIII/2025 here.

Author         : Sri Pujianti
Editor          : N. Rosi
PR               : Tiara Agustina
Translator     : 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.

---