Former Deputy Minister of Law and Human Rights Claims Indonesian Elections Returning to Closed Proportional System

Jakarta, CNBC Indonesia – The Indonesian political scene was excited, yesterday. The trigger was a tweet by former Deputy Minister of Law and Human Rights Denny Indrayana regarding the ongoing trial for review of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning General Elections at the Constitutional Court.

“This morning I received important information. The Constitutional Court will decide that the legislative election will return to a closed proportional system, again choosing only party symbols. The information states that the composition of the decision is 6 to 3 dissenting,” Denny said as quoted from his personal Twitter account.

So, who is the source of information that Denny calls important? He was reluctant to explain. To be sure, that person is highly credible.

“What is certain is not a Constitutional Justice. So, we return to the New Order election system: authoritarian and corrupt,” said Denny.

On that occasion, he also commented that the KPK has been controlled by the government. This is indicated by leaders who tend to have problems who are rewarded with a one-year term extension of gratification.

Then Denny said that the Presidential Chief of Staff Moeldoko would review the decision regarding the Democrat Party’s alleged exchange with the judicial mafia corruption case at the Supreme Court.

“If the Democrats succeed in being “pickpocketed”, as Gus Rommy PPP termed it, then Anies Baswedan’s candidacy is almost certain to fail. Is there still hope? What is certain is that we will continue to strive, while waiting for miracles. Greetings, integrity,” said Denny.

The 6th President of the Republic of Indonesia, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, also commented on Denny’s tweets via his personal Twitter account. According to SBY, Denny is a former Deputy Minister of Law and Human Rights and a credible legal expert.

“If what Prof. Denny Indrayana said is “reliable”, that the Constitutional Court will establish a Closed Proportional System, and not an Open Proportional System as is currently in effect, then this will become a big issue in the world of politics in Indonesia *SBY,” wrote SBY.

SBY then submitted three questions to the MK relating to the electoral system that the MK wanted to decide on.

a. Is there a crisis & emergency so that the electoral system is changed when the election process has started? SBY reminded that the DCS (Temporary Candidate List) had just been submitted to the KPU.

“Change of the electoral system in the middle of the road can cause political “chaos” for *SBY*,” he wrote.

b. Is it true that the Open Election System Law contradicts the constitution? According to SBY, according to the constitution, the domain & authority of the Constitutional Court is to assess whether a law is against the constitution, & not to determine which law is most appropriate ~ Closed or Open Electoral System.

“If the Constitutional Court does not have strong arguments that the Open Election System is contrary to the constitution so that it is changed to Closed, it will be difficult for the majority of the people to accept it. Remember, all state institutions including the President, DPR & MK must be equally accountable before the people *SBY*,” wrote SBY.

c. In fact, the formulation of laws regarding the electoral system is in the hands of the President and the DPR, not in the hands of the Constitutional Court. According to SBY, the President and DPR should have a say in this matter.

“The majority of political parties have expressed their stance against changing the open system to a closed one. *SBY* must hear this,” he wrote.

Furthermore, SBY is sure, in compiling DCS, political parties & candidates assume that the election system has not been changed, it remains an open system. If in the middle of the road it is changed by the Constitutional Court, it becomes a serious problem.

“KPU & political parties must be ready to manage this “crisis”. Hopefully it will not interfere with the implementation of the 2024 elections. Poor *SBY* people,” wrote SBY.

“My view is that the 2024 election will continue to use the Open Proportional System. After the 2024 election, the President and the DPR will sit together to review the current electoral system for the possibility of improving it into a better system. Also listen to the voice of *SBY* people.”

On the other hand, MK spokesman Fajar Laksono admitted that he was not aware of any information suggesting that the result of the trial court ruling related to the Election Law would make the electoral system proportionally closed again. Even about the existence of a dissenting opinion, Fajar gave the same answer.

“I don’t know yet. (Regarding the dissenting opinion) I don’t know either,” said Fajar as reported detik.com.

The Coordinating Minister for Political, Legal and Security Affairs Mahfud MD also tweeted in response to the information conveyed by Denny. According to him, the Constitutional Court’s decision should not be leaked before it is read out.

“This information from Denny sets a bad precedent, it can be categorized as leaking state secrets. The police must investigate A1’s information which is said to be Denny’s source so that it does not turn into speculation that contains slander,” said Mahfud as quoted from his personal Twitter account.

“The Constitutional Court’s decision is strictly confidential before it is read, but it must be made wide open after it has been decided by hammering the verdict in an official and open session. As a former chief justice, I do not dare to ask for a hint, let alone ask about the Constitutional Court’s verdict which has not yet been read as an official verdict. The Constitutional Court must investigate the source of the information.”

As is known, in the last hearing on Tuesday (25/5/2023) yesterday, the Constitutional Court emphasized that the judicial review examination session on the electoral system had been completed. In the near future, the Constitutional Court will decide the fate of the 2024 electoral system, whether open proportional, closed proportional or using a new/mixed model.

“This is the last trial,” said Deputy Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Saldi Isra during the trial.

The Constitutional Court respects the parties who wish to submit experts for their testimony to be heard during the trial. However, because the time was past the deadline, he was forced to be unable to appear in court.

MK provides an alternative to put his opinion in writing.

“If there are still objections, please submit them to a conclusion, we will evaluate the objections,” said Saldi Isra.

The Court emphasized that it was not delaying the application.

“This needs affirmations because we will finish this petition. So don’t accuse the Court of delaying either,” said Saldi Isra.

Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Anwar Usman asked the parties to submit conclusions within the next week. After that, the Constitutional Court will hold a Judge Deliberative Meeting to decide on the case. The Court did not mention when the decision would be made.

“The next agenda is the conclusion of each party, no later than the next 7 days,” said Anwar Usman.

As is well known, the open proportional electoral system judicial review was sued by:

1. Demas Brian Wicaksono (PDIP Probolinggo branch)
2. Yuwono Pintadi
3. Fahrurrozi (read legislature 2024)
4. Ibnu Rachman Jaya (resident of Jagakarsa, South Jakarta)
5. Riyanto (Pekalongan resident)
6. Nono Marijono (Depok resident)

The Petitioner argued that political parties have the function of recruiting qualified and qualified candidates for legislative members. Therefore, political parties have the authority to determine candidates who will sit in the legislature.

“Stating the phrase ‘proportional’ Article 168 paragraph 2 of the Election Law does not have binding legal force as long as it does not mean ‘closed proportional system’,” explained the applicant.

A closed proportional system has characteristics in the concept of political party sovereignty. Political parties have the sovereignty to determine their cadres to sit in representative institutions through a series of education and political recruitment processes that are carried out democratically as mandated by the Law on Political Parties.

“Thus, there is a guarantee to voters that the candidates chosen by political parties have the quality and ability to represent the people,” explained the applicant.

(mg/mg)