Jakarta –
Constitutional Law expert and General Chair of the Indonesian Law Postgraduate Doctoral Association, Abdul Chair Ramadhan said Constitutional Court (MK) has no authority to prosecute administrative violations Election. He said the Constitutional Court only had the authority to handle vote counting using a quantitative approach.
“That the authority of the Constitutional Court is only regarding the results of vote counting using a quantitative approach. The Constitutional Court has no authority to judge Administrative Election Violations, especially TSM, which incidentally has a qualitative approach,” said Abdul in a written statement, Friday (29/3/2024).
Reflecting on the petition of the two applicants, namely candidate pairs number 1 and 3, Adbul said that the main point of the petitum was regarding allegations of election administration violations, especially in a Structured, Systematic and Massive (TSM) manner. He emphasized that election administration violations, including those involving TSM, are the domain of the Election Supervisory Body (Bawasalu).
“However, the argument must have the quality to then correspond to the vote acquisition as determined by the General Election Commission (KPU). In this case, the determination is a cause-and-effect relationship (causality). Stopping here, it needs to be emphasized that Administrative Violation “Elections, including those that occur via TSM, are the absolute authority of the Election Supervisory Body (Bawaslu),” he said.
Abdul explained that administrative election violations in all their forms are different from disputes over vote counting results which are the domain of the Constitutional Court. He explained that the dispute over the vote results was certainly not a qualitative approach, but rather mathematical (quantitative).
“The joke that calls the Constitutional Court a “Calculator Court” is correct, and indeed the main point of the lawsuit must be calculated. This must be able to be proven in front of the Panel of Judges at the Constitutional Court,” he said.
“First, there is a request for a dispute over the results of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Elections to the Constitutional Court. Second, there is no request for a dispute over the results of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Elections to the Constitutional Court,” he continued.
Abdul explained that there must be a report of alleged election administrative violations first submitted to BBe careful according to the formulation of Article 12 of Bawaslu Regulation Number 8 of 2022, if not, it will give rise to legal consequences. The lawsuit was filed before the KPU determined the results of the votes for the Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidates.
“These two different conditions give rise to legal consequences, as regulated in Article 12 of Bawaslu Regulation Number 8 of 2022. If there is a request to the Constitutional Court as long as there is a Report of alleged Administrative Election Fraud to Bawaslu, then Bawaslu must stop the report and submit it to the Constitutional Court in “hearing disputes over the results of the Presidential and Vice Presidential elections. On the other hand, if there is no application to the Constitutional Court, even though there has previously been a report of alleged Administrative Election Fraud submitted to Bawaslu, then Bawaslu will examine, review and decide on the report,” he said.
Abdul said that both camps 01 and 03 had previously not submitted reports of alleged election administrative violations to Bawasalu. Thus, the alleged election administrative violations that were sued to the Constitutional Court have lost their object.
“In the a quo case, the two Petitioners apparently did not submit a Report of alleged Election Administrative Fraud to Bawaslu. This has the effect that the alleged Election Administrative Fraud is deemed to have never existed. It is said that even though there was a PHPU-Pres petition to the Constitutional Court, there was no Report of alleged violation administrative to Bawaslu, then the alleged election administrative violation has lost its object,” he said.
“It would be a different matter if the Petitioner did not submit a PHPU-Pres, but brought the case to Bawaslu. In this case, Bawaslu, based on its competence, can recommend the cancellation of the Presidential and Vice Presidential Candidate Pairs on the basis of Bawaslu’s decision regarding Administrative Election Violations by TSM to the KPU. The KPU is will decide regarding the disqualification,” he added.
(dek/dhn)
2024-03-29 03:54:56
#Constitutional #Expert #Authority #Adjudicate #Administrative #Election #Violations
