South Kalimantan Elections Commission Clarifies Revocation of LPRI’s Election Observer Status

Constitutional Justice Enny Nurbaningsih showing evidence to the Respondent, Related Parties, and the Bawaslu during the hearing of Case Number 318/PHPU.WAKO-XXIII/2025 on the 2024 Banjarbaru City mayoral election result dispute, Tuesday (20/5/2025). Photo by MKRI/Bayu.

JAKARTA, MKRI – The South Kalimantan Provincial Elections Commission (KPU), as the Respondent, acknowledged that it had revoked the status and rights of the Indonesian Reform Monitoring Institute (LPRI) as an election observer. This decision was based on a recommendation issued by the Banjarbaru City Election Supervisory Body (Bawaslu) dated 30 April 2025. In the recommendation, Bawaslu concluded that Syarifah, representing LPRI (the Petitioner), was found to have committed a violation and was deemed not to have maintained neutrality as an election observer.

This statement was delivered by Raden Liani Afrianty, legal counsel for the Respondent when giving the Respondent’s Answer in the 2024 Banjarbaru City Mayor and Deputy Mayor Election Results Dispute, registered as Case Number 318/PHPU.WAKO-XXIII/2025. The second hearing was held on Tuesday (20 May 2025) with the agenda of hearing responses from the Respondent, Related Parties, and Bawaslu.

"Before revoking the Petitioner’s status and rights as an election monitoring organization, the Respondent fulfilled its obligations as mandated by Article 129 paragraphs (1) and (2) of the Election Law in conjunction with Article 54 paragraphs (1) and (2) of General Election Commission Regulation Number 9 of 2022 concerning Public Participation in General Elections and the Election of Governors and Deputy Governors, Regents and Deputy Regents, and/or Mayors and Deputy Mayors," stated Liani before the Panel of Justices chaired by Constitutional Justice Arief Hidayat, and accompanied by Constitutional Justices Anwar Usman and Enny Nurbaningsih.

Based on the aforementioned explanation, the revocation of the Petitioner’s status and rights as an election monitor means that the Petitioner no longer possesses legal standing to submit a petition to the Court.

"Therefore, there are sufficient legal grounds for the Court to declare that the Petitioner does not have legal standing to file the a quo petition," he stated.

In its statement, the Respondent also disclosed that during the voting and vote-counting process, as well as the recapitulation of vote-counting results at both the sub-district and district levels, no objections were raised by any party, including the Petitioner, who primarily objected to the distribution process of the Model C. Notification-KWK form to voters.

"Moreover, the Respondent never received any recommendation from Banjarbaru City Bawaslu or its staff indicating that the Respondent had committed a violation in the distribution process of the Model C. Notification-KWK form," Liani stated.

Petitioner’s Argument Based on Mere Assumptions

On the same occasion, the sole candidate pair, Erna Lisa Halaby and Wartono, represented by Azhar Ridhanie as legal counsel for the Related Party, firmly rejected all of the Petitioner’s arguments—including the request for the Court to disqualify his clients. He described the allegations of vote-buying and money politics as baseless assumptions.

"The Petitioner’s arguments are merely a theoretical construction—hypothetical and probabilistic in nature—not grounded in empirical, verifiable facts," said Azhar.

He also dismissed accusations that the Related Party was part of an autocratic or oligarchic circle. According to him, all stages of the revote had been conducted in accordance with legal procedures and the Constitutional Court's ruling.

Preventive Steps Already in Place

Meanwhile, Nor Ikhsan, representing Banjarbaru City Bawaslu, explained that his party had taken preventive measures by urging all elements of local government, including the TNI, Police, and sub-district and village officials, to remain neutral during the revote process.

Regarding the handling of violations, Ikhsan stated that Bawaslu had received two reports, which were officially registered for further processing. “We clarified the complainant, the two reported parties, and a witness, and also conducted an on-site visit to the location of the alleged violation,” he said. However, as the investigation neared the time limit for resolution, the complainant withdrew both reports.

Previously, in the preliminary hearing, Syarifah, the Petitioner and election observer in this case, revealed that she had faced intimidation and pressure following her submission of the petition to the Constitutional Court. She stated that LPRI’s license as a monitoring institution had been revoked, and that she had even been named a suspect by law enforcement authorities. Syarifah also mentioned experiencing pressure from various parties to withdraw the lawsuit but emphasized her determination to continue the struggle. The Petitioner further alleged that there were structured, systematic, and massive (TSM) violations during the revote, including money politics, the non-neutrality of state apparatus, and intimidation of both voters and election observers.

News

South Kalimantan Elections Commission Clarifies Revocation of LPRI’s Election Observer Status