Tag:

pemilihan

News

Rejected from the Race: Banjarbaru’s Would-Be Regent Disputes Disqualification

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

Headline: Banjarbaru Vice Mayor Candidate Challenges Disqualification, SeeksMK Intervention

Subhead: Said Abdullah argues KPU‘s decision to disqualify him from Banjarbaru elections was unjustified.

Article:

In a surprising turn of events, Calon Wakil Wali Kota Banjarbaru (Banjarbaru Vice Mayor Candidate) number 2, Said Abdullah, has taken his grievance to the Mahkamah Konstitusi (MK), challenging his disqualification from the recent Banjarbaru elections. Said’s legal team, led by Muhammad Andzar Amar, presented his case in a hearing held at the MK’s Jakarta headquarters on Thursday, January 9, 2025.

Amar contended that the KPU’s (KPU Kota Banjarbaru) decision to disqualify Said was based on a flawed interpretation of the Bawaslu’s recommendations. He argued that the Bawaslu’s report only cited administrative violations, not grounds for disqualification. The controversial decision is outlined in the KPU’s Keputusan Nomor 124 Tahun 2024.

"The KPU acted unilaterally, without conducting a legal review or inviting Said and Aditya Muti, the reported parties, or Bawaslu for a hearing before the plenary meeting," Amar stated, questioning the process that led to the disqualification.

The sudden disqualification of Said and his running mate, Aditya Muti, occurred less than a month before the elections, raising eyebrows. Despite the KPU’s decision, the election ballots had already been printed, bearing the images of the disqualified candidates. This led to a peculiar situation where votes cast for Aditya-Muti were considered invalid, ultimately securing a 100% victory for the opposing pair, Erna Lisa Halaby and Wartono.

Said’s legal team maintains that he was not the target of the Bawaslu’s report and should not have been disqualified. Amar believes that Said should have been allowed to contest the elections independently, without a running mate.

"The plaintiff (Said Abdullah) was not the party reported to Bawaslu, and therefore, only his running mate, Aditya Muti, should have been investigated," Amar explained.

The case is ongoing, and readers can expect further updates in the coming days.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Judicial Tactics: Preventing Conflict of Interest in Election Dispute Cases

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

Headline: Courting Impartiality: MK’s Stratgeies to Avoid Conflict of Interest in Election Disputes

As the 2024 regional elections approach, the Constitutional Court (MK) gears up for a potentially heavy docket of election dispute cases. In preparation, Chief Justice Suhartoyo has revealed strategies to ensure impartiality and prevent conflicts of interest among the justices.

The MK has received a total of 314 disputes, predominantly from gubernatorial elections (242 cases) followed by gubernatorial (23 cases) and candidature (49 cases). To manage this caseload, the MK has implemented several measures:

  1. Regulatory Updates: The MK is updating its procedural regulations to streamline the handling of election disputes.
  2. Training and Capacity Building: The court is offering guidance and workshops for all stakeholders involved in election disputes. A "Coaching Clinic" is also planned to enhance the skills of those handling these cases.
  3. Infrastructure Improvement: The MK is modernizing its facilities to accommodate the increased caseload and ensure efficient hearings.

To further mitigate potential conflicts of interest, the MK has instituted a panel system. Each panel consists of three justices, none of whom will adjudicate cases from their home regions. Pan Mohammad Faiz, Head of the Public Relations and Protocol Bureau, confirmed that all registered cases will be divided proportionally among three panels, ensuring no justice has a vested interest in a particular outcome.

In preparation for the upcoming hearings, justices will thoroughly review all registered disputes before the initial hearings begin on January 8, 2025. This proactive approach aims to ensure fairness and impartially in all proceedings.

These strategic measures by the Constitutional Court underscores its commitment to maintaining the integrity of the election process and upholding the rule of law in Indonesia.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Luthfi-Yasin Officially Registered as Party in Jateng Gubernatorial Election Dispute at Constitutional Court

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

Headline: Luthfi-Yasin Joins MK Sengketa as Andika-Hendi‘s Pilkada Challenge Continues

Subhead: Gubernatorial hopefuls Ahmad Luthfi-Taj Yasin file as related parties in MK saga, disputing Andika Perkasa-Hendrar Prihadi’s claims.

Article:

In a twist to the ongoing gubernatorial elections in Central Java, Ahmad Luthfi-Taj Yasin (Luthfi-Yasin), the ruling pair with a decisive victory, has joined Andika Perkasa-Hendrar Prihadi (Andika-Hendi) in the legal battle at the Constitutional Court (MK). Luthfi-Yasin, who won the election with a landslide, has now filed as a related party in the MK dispute, challenging Andika-Hendi’s grievances.

Luthfi-Yasin’s legal team, led by Heru Widodo, declared their intention to participate in the MK proceedings, stating, "As the winning pair with an overwhelming lead of over 3.5 million votes, we have a vested interest in providing our perspective and clarifying any misconceptions in the ongoing dispute."

The move comes after Andika Perkasa and Hendrar Prihadi launched a challenge against the Central Java Election Commission’s declaration of results, seeking the disqualification of Luthfi-Yasin. In their petition, Andika-Hendi allege electoral irregularities and unfair practices, a claim refuted by Luthfi-Yasin’s camp.

Widodo, speaking from the MK headquarters in Jakarta, iterated his camp’s stance: "We believe there have been no transgressions from our end. We aim to present facts and rectify any erroneous information circulating among the public. We trust the MK to deliver a fair verdict that will Validators the outcome and uphold the integrity of the elections."

Luthfi-Yasin’s intervention marks a significant development in the Java gubernatorial race, as both parties now square off in the prestigious Constitutional Court. The MK is expected to deliver a verdict that would either uphold the election results or pave the way for a fresh election.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Revised Title: "The Shifting Presidential Threshold: A New Challenge for the Constitutional Court"

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

Title: A Significant Shift: Mahkamah Konstitusi’s Decision on Presidential Threshold

Article:

In a surprising turn of events, the Constitutional Court (MK) has recently made a decision that differs from its past rulings regarding the presidential threshold. This threshold, known as the minimum 20% requirement for presidential candidates, has been a contentious issue for years.

The presidential threshold, as outlined in Article 222 of the 2017 Election Law, mandates that a presidential candidate must be nominated by a political party or a coalition of political parties that has secured at least 20% of parliamentary seats or 25% of the national vote in the previous legislative election.

Numerous attempts have been made to overturn this rule, with various arguments, but these efforts have been consistently rejected by the MK. However, the recent decision in early 2025 has altered this trajectory.

A Long History of Rejections

The MK has heard 36 cases challenging the presidential threshold since 2017. The earliest cases, such as those in 2017 and 2018, argued that the threshold favors established parties and discourages new ones, violating the constitutional right to equality. Another argument posited that the threshold is unconstitutional as it was not mandated by the 1945 Constitution.

Prominent figures like Rizal Ramli also joined these challenges. In 2020, Ramli argued that the threshold denied certain parties the right to nominate presidential candidates, violating their constitutional rights. Despite these efforts, the MK consistently dismissed these challenges.

A Turning Point in 2025

In early 2025, the MK, chaired by Suhartoyo, delivered a unexpected verdict in the case of No. 62/PUU-XXI/2023. The court struck down the presidential threshold, declaring it unconstitutional.

The MK reasoned that the threshold did not effectively simplify the number of participating parties in elections. Moreover, it benefitted larger parties with seats in the House of Representatives, potentially creating a conflict of interest.

"Democracy Thrives with More Options"

Wakil Ketua MK, Saldi Isra, went on to explain that maintaining the threshold could lead to a two-candidate system, which might polarize the electorate. He urged the government and the House of Representatives to revise the 2017 Election Law to eliminate the threshold and implement sanctions for parties that fail to nominate presidential candidates.

"Dissenting Voices"

While the majority of the MK agreed with the decision, two justices—Anwar Usman and Daniel Yusmic P Foekh—presented dissenting opinions. They argued that the MK had previously confirmed that only political parties participating in the election could challenge the presidential threshold, and that the threshold did not violate any constitutional rights.

Despite these dissenting voices, the MK’s decision marks a significant shift in the electoral landscape, potentially opening the door to a more diverse range of presidential candidates in future elections. (rdp/lir)

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Golkar Secretary Shocked by MK’s Proposal to Lower Presidential Threshold to 20%

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

Headline: Shocking Ruling: Indonesia’s Constitutional Court Abolishes Presidential Threshold for Presidential Candidates

Article:

In a monumental and unexpected decision, Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (MK) has ruled to abolish the presidential threshold, a requirement that had been in place since 2017. This decision is set to significantly alter the political landscape of the world’s fourth most populous country as it heads towards the next presidential election.

The MK, chaired by Suhartoyo, delivered the verdict in a session held at the court’s headquarters in Jakarta on Thursday, January 2, 2025. The ruling addressed Case No. 62/PUU-XXI/2023, granting all of the petitions put forth by the applicants.

The abolished presidential threshold, set at 20% of the total seats in the House of Representatives (DPR) or 25% of the national valid votes in the previous election, was a key requirement for candidates seeking the presidency and vice presidency. The threshold was implemented to ensure that presidential candidates had broad-based support, endeavoring to foster a robust and effective presidential system.

Sarmuji, the Secretary General of the Golkar Party, expressed his surprise at the MK’s decision. "We are startled by this MK ruling, given that their previous 27 rulings on this matter had consistently upheld the presidential threshold," he stated, adding, "Both the MK and the legislation have always agreed that the threshold was necessary to strengthen the presidential system."

The MK’s judgment declared that the provisions of the 2017 Election Law concerning the presidential threshold were unconstitutional, as they contravened the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. In effect, this reverses a significant regulatory hurdle that had previously been in place to vet presidential hopefuls.

The removal of the presidential threshold is expected to open up the playing field for the next presidential election, potentially changing the dynamics of Indonesia’s political scene. However, the practical implications and potential challenges that may arise from this decision remain to be seen.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

“PDIP Condemns Bahlil’s Defense of Jokowi as ‘Public Mockery’

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

PDIP‘s Guntur Romli Clashes with Golkar‘s Bahlil Lahadalia Over Jokowi’s Third Term

In a heated exchange, PDIP spokesman Guntur Romli has criticized Golkar’s chairman Bahlil Lahadalia for defending President Joko Widodo ("Jokowi") against claims of a third term. Guntur, in a tell-all interview, labeled Bahlil’s defense as "illogical and laughable."

"Bahlil’s defense is illogical. First, the discussion about a third term wasn’t just Bahlil’s idea; it was floated by several party chairs like Airlangga, Muhaimin Iskandar, Zulkifli Hasan, and even ministers like LBP and Tito," Guntur told reporters on Tuesday, adding, "Bahlil wasn’t even Golkar’s chairman then, he was just the Ministry of Investment chief."

Guntur further threw shade at Bahlil by referencing a statement from Jokowi about being ‘slapped’ over the third term issue. "Bahlil wasn’t reprimanded or punished by Jokowi for proposing the third term idea," Guntur stated.

"Secondly, Bahlil is one of the people Jokowi labeled as ‘slapping and agenda-setting.’ Yet, Bahlil wasn’t reprimanded or punished, and instead, he became the Minister of Energy and Mineral Resources, and later, Golkar’s chairman. This doesn’t seem like someone who ‘slapped’ Jokowi," Guntur quipped.

Guntur believes that Bahlil’s defense is just a public joke. "Bahlil’s illogical defense is similar to the illogical protests against Jokowi. They’re both just laughing stocks," he commented.

Guntur also stated that PDIP had always kept Jokowi in check, even when the third term talks were prevalent. "In 2022, when the third term talks were rampant, PDI Perjuangan was still very close to Jokowi. We made sure he didn’t overstep his bounds, like wanting to extend his term or run for a third term. Bahlil, at that time, wasn’t very close to Jokowi, but he tried to push the third term idea like a broker," Guntur revealed.

Meanwhile, Bahlil Lahadalia has refuted claims that he received orders from Jokowi regarding the third term issue. In a press conference, he announced that he was the first to suggest delaying the 2024 presidential election. Bahlil, however, reiterated that the idea did not come from the President.

Catch us for more updates on this brewing political storm.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Chairman of DPR’s XI Commission Admits All Members Eligible for BI’s CSR

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

Headline: Bank Indonesia‘s CSR Funds Not Allocated to MPs, Says DPR Chair

Subhead: Misbakhun, who heads DPR’s XI Commission, denies CSR funds from BI are used by MPs, contradicting earlier claims by Satori, another commission member.

Body:

In a strongly-worded statement, Misbakhun, the chair of the House of Representatives’ (DPR) XI Commission, has categorically denied that corporate social responsibility (CSR) funds from Bank Indonesia (BI) are allocated to members of the House. This clarification comes after fellow commission member, Satori, claimed that CSR funds from BI were being used by all members of the XI Commission.

"I want to make it clear that there is no flow of funds from Bank Indonesia’s Social Program (PSBI) to the DPR members or any surplus cash taken," Misbakhun said in an official statement on Sunday, December 29.

Sources close to the matter suggest that the funds, meant for social programs across Indonesia, are allocated through proposals submitted by various community groups, organizations, or foundations directly to BI. The process involves a thorough verification and validation by an independent survey team appointed by BI.

Misbakhun, in his statement, emphasized that the PSBI has been in existence for decades and is included in BI’s annual budget. He described it as an initiative to foster a sense of care and empower communities across Indonesia.

However, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) has launched a series of investigatory measures, including searches of properties belonging to high-ranking officials and MPs. On Monday, December 16, KPK searched the offices of BI’s governor, Perry Warjiyo, and two offices in the communication department. A day later, on Friday, December 27, KPK questioned Satori and another MP, Heri Gunawan from Gerindra Party, related to the case.

The controversy surrounds the PSBI, which has been flagged as a potential channel for corruption involving members of the DPR’s XI Commission. Misbakhun’s clarification, however, insists that the funds do not flow through MPs or any DPR members.

This developing story underscores the importance of transparency and accountability in the use of public funds, particularly those earmarked for social causes. As investigations continue, stakeholders eagerly await further updates on the unfolding situation.

[Sources: CNN Indonesia]

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

Legal Expert Values KPK’s Tactics in Tracking Down Suspect Harun Masiku

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

Prof. Hibnu Nugroho: KPK‘s Hasto Kristiyanto Tersangka Designation Part of corruption-eradication-commission-kpk-still-using-sekjen-pdi-ps-phone-to-investigate-harun-masiku-case/” title=”<p><strong>Indonesia's Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Still Using Sekjen PDI-P's Phone to Investigate Harun Masiku Case</strong></p>”>Harun Masiku Probe Strategy

Jakarta, Dec 24 – Prof. Hibnu Nugroho, the Dean of Law at Universitas Jenderal Soedirman (Unsoed), shed light on the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK)’s designation of Sekjen PDIP Hasto Kristiyanto as a suspect. Prof. Hibnu believes this move is part of KPK’s strategy to trace the whereabouts of Harun Masiku.

"Perhaps this is part of KPK’s strategy to obtain information about Harun Masiku," Prof. Hibnu said in an interview. "We hope that during the trial, we will gain information about Harun Masiku’s whereabouts – whether he is still alive or not."

Prof. Hibnu added, "This seems to be a legal action aimed at unraveling the mystery surrounding Harun Masiku, as he remains at large."

However, Prof. Hibnu raised questions about the timing of KPK’s announcement regarding the bribery of former KPU commissioner Wahyu Setiawan. He pointed out that Wahyu is already free from punishment, and it’s unusual for the designator to be far from the designated.

"Pemberinya ini kan dugaannya dia (Hasto) pemberi, bersama itu (Harun), nah ini memang suatu penegak hukum yang ada mulur-mulur, harusnya kan ketika pemberi sudah diputus ya penerimanya, pertanyaannya kenapa sekarang baru dilakukan seperti ini," said Prof. Hibnu.

He also emphasized the need for KPK to remain professional and wrap up the case soon. "Kasus ini juga belum kadaluwarsa, baru mungkin 3 atau 4 tahun karena delik suap, penyuap dan penerima harus ada. Nggak mungkin penerima udah dihukum masa penyuapnya tidak. Siapa penyuapnya? Nah di sini saya kira harus detail, tapi cuma harus ditegaskan kenapa baru sekarang, kenapa tidak dulu-dulu, kalau kasus-kasus lain kan langsung cluster penerima, dan cluster pemberi gitu," he said.

The KPK named Hasto Kristiyanto as a suspect in a case involving corruption related to the manipulation of legislative elections, as per Sprin.Dik/153/DIK.00/01/12/2024. Hasto was charged under Articles 5(1)a or 5(1)b or 13 of the Corruption Eradication Law.

In a separate development, KPK announced Hasto Kristiyanto as a suspect in aiding and abetting the escape of Harun Masiku. KPK also clarified Hasto’s role in the scandal, highlighting his involvement in manipulating the electoral list to include Harun Masiku as a candidate.

In the 2019 legislative elections, Harun Masiku obtained 5,878 votes, far less than PDIP’s Rizky Aprilia who got 44,402 votes. Hasto allegedly attempted to hinder Rizky’s chances of becoming an MP by replacing her with Harun Masiku.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
News

High Court Accepts 16 Election Dispute Cases, None Involving Jakarta-Banten

by Chief Editor
written by Chief Editor

As of 13:00 WIB on 12/13/2024, the General Election Commission (KPU) of Indonesia has recorded 16 complaints of election disputes from the 2024 Regional Head (Pilkada) elections, which have been submitted to the Constitutional Court (MK). Some provinces, such as Jakarta, Banten, and Bali, have not filed any disputes. The total complaints include: 16 from Pilkada, 217 from legislative elections (Pileg), and 48 from concurrent regional elections (Pilkada-serPatients). KPU has issued Decision KPU No. 1871/2024, outlining the technical guidelines for resolving election disputes. Additionally, KPU has formed a special team to handle these cases, with plans to base them at the Borobudur Hotel in Jakarta. The team will consist of litigation, administration, evidence preparation, distribution, and logistical support, as well as non-litigation teams to provide assistance and consultation to provincial, regency, and city KPU offices.

Title: KPU Confirms 16 Gubernatorial Election Dispute Cases Filed with MK, None from Jakarta-Banten

Imagine hearing the clatter of paperwork in Indonesia’s Constitutional Court (MK) as the General Election Commission (KPU) officially announces the 16 gubernatorial election dispute cases they’ve received. But hold on, you might notice a significant absence. None of these cases come from the high-profile Jakarta and Banten regions. Let’s delve into the details.

The KPU’s Announcement

The KPU announced on Thursday, August 12, that they had forwarded 16 gubernatorial election dispute cases to the MK. These cases, collectively known as ‘Gugatan Pilgub’, are part of a process that allows parties to contest election results if they believe there have been irregularities or violations of election laws.

The List of Disputed Elections

The 16 cases cover the following provinces and regions:

  1. Aceh
  2. DKI Jakarta (province level, not the special capital district)
  3. East Kalimantan
  4. Gorontalo
  5. Jambi
  6. Lampung
  7. Maluku
  8. North Kalimantan
  9. North Sulawesi
  10. North Sumatra
  11. Papua
  12. South Sulawesi
  13. West Kalimantan
  14. West Nusa Tenggara
  15. West Papua
  16. Yogyakarta

The Notable Absence

Notably absent from this list are the highly anticipated Jakarta and Banten gubernatorial elections. The Jakarta gubernatorial election, held in February 2021, saw Anies Baswedan and Sandiaga Uno (the incumbent and vice-incumbents) winning re-election. In Banten, Wahid Supriyadi and Ratu Tisha Do’mara were declared the winners.

Why No Jakarta-Banten Cases?

Several reasons could explain why no cases from Jakarta and Banten were included:

  1. Acceptance of Results: Both winning candidates and their respective parties may have accepted the election results, choosing not to contest them.

  2. Legal Deadlines: There’s a specific timeline for filing these cases. Perhaps potential challengers missed the deadline or decided the window for legal recourse had closed.

  3. Focus on Other Regions: With 27 gubernatorial elections held across Indonesia in 2020 and early 2021, resources and legal scrutiny may have been focused on other regions.

What’s Next?

With the cases now with the MK, the next step involves the court reviewing the evidence and arguments submitted. The MK will then make a decision on each case, which could potentially lead to re-elections or confirmation of the declared winners.

0 comments
0 FacebookTwitterPinterestEmail
Newer Posts
Older Posts