Jakarta (ANTARA) – The Association for Elections and Democracy (Perludem) stated that the Constitutional Court must have a perspective on the quality of evidence in considering the verdict of the general election results dispute (PHPU) case.
“We see that the Constitutional Court still has a perspective to see how the quality of evidence is rather than just related to the difference in results,” Perludem researcher Kahfi Adlan Hafiz said in a media discussion entitled “Launching the Monitoring Results of the Dispute over the Results of the Presidential and Vice Presidential General Elections at the Constitutional Court” in the Cikini area, Jakarta, Wednesday.
He said the Constitutional Court must be able to further prove the arguments submitted by the applicant in the PHPU case.
Kahfi gave an example of the alleged social assistance (bansos) that was used to increase the votes of the Prabowo-Gibran candidate pair.
According to him, the Constitutional Court must be able to prove whether there was misuse and whether or not there was an impact of social assistance on a person’s electability, not just procedurally.
He also regretted that the Constitutional Court relied more on the testimony of the General Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) for the argument of election violations that occurred before the election until voting.
“In fact, the Constitutional Court itself said in its corrective advice that Bawaslu in carrying out the handling of violations of election law still prioritizes procedural,” he said.
Nevertheless, Perludem appreciates the Constitutional Court for being willing to explore the arguments of the petition, one of which is by requesting the testimony of four ministers, namely Coordinating Minister for PMK Muhadjir Effendy, Coordinating Minister for the Economy Airlangga Hartarto, Minister of Social Affairs Tri Rismaharini, and Minister of Finance Sri Mulyani Indrawati.
“Whatever it is, we must respect the decision and the corrective suggestions must be evaluated together so that we can get an electoral legal framework that can guarantee the principles of direct, general, free, honest and fair elections,” he concluded.
The Constitutional Court decided two cases of disputes over the 2024 presidential election submitted by Anies Baswedan-Muhaimin Iskandar and Ganjar Pranowo-Mahfud Md. The verdict reading session was led by Chief Justice Suhartoyo.
In its ruling, the Constitutional Court rejected all requests submitted by Anies-Muhaimin and Ganjar-Pranowo. The requests of the two camps were not well-founded according to the law in their entirety.
On the verdict, there were dissenting opinions from three constitutional judges, namely Saldi Isra, Enny Nurbaningsih, and Arief Hidayat. In essence, the three constitutional judges stated that the Constitutional Court should have ordered re-voting in several regions.
In their petition, Ganjar-Mahfud and Anies-Muhaimin essentially asked the Constitutional Court to cancel KPU Decree Number 360 of 2024 concerning the determination of the results of the general election for president and vice president in 2024.
They also asked the Constitutional Court to disqualify the Prabowo Subianto-Gibran Rakabuming Raka pair as participants in the 2024 presidential election. Then, they asked the Constitutional Court to order the KPU to conduct a re-vote for the 2024 presidential election without including Prabowo-Gibran.
This article was published on Antaranews.com with the title “Perludem: Constitutional Court must improve the quality of PHPU case evidence”, https://www.antaranews.com/berita/4073334/perludem-mk-harus-tingkatkan-kualitas-pembuktian-perkara-phpu