The General Chair of PDIP, Megawati Soekarnoputri, has intervened by writing an amicus curiae to the Constitutional Court because Indonesian democracy is not well. #kbanews
JAKARTA | KBA – The Constitutional Court’s decision to reject the election dispute petition from presidential candidate pair number 3, Ganjar Pranowo and Mahfud MD, signifies that Indonesian democracy is in darkness.
This was stated by the Chair of the Ganjar-Mahfud Legal Deputy Team after attending the Constitutional Court’s Plenary Session which announced the decision regarding the election dispute in Jakarta, Monday (22/10/2024).
“If asked whether I am disappointed, yes I am personally disappointed because I had expectations that the Constitutional Court would make a breakthrough, since our democracy and constitution’s future needs it. Even today I mentioned that this marks a historical milestone for elections in Indonesia,” said Todung.
He expressed concerns about the Constitutional Court’s decision to reject all applications from Candidate Pair 3 because they were considered legally unfounded, despite the presence of facts and evidence that supported their arguments.
This, he continued, also shows that the Constitutional Court did not consider the inputs and views of community leaders and academics, even students who are concerned about the conduct of the 2024 Elections.
“Imagine thousands of academics and community leaders giving Amicus Curiae to the Constitutional Court. This indicates that something is disturbing and unsettling the public, that Indonesian democracy is in darkness,” Todung stated.
PDI Perjuangan Party General Chair Megawati Soekarnoputri, went as far as to write an amicus curiae to the Constitutional Court because she believes that Indonesian democracy is not doing well.
“Megawati herself coming down to write an amicus curiae, shows that something is wrong with this country, something is wrong with our democracy,” Todung disclosed.
Despite this, Todung says the Constitutional Court has made its decision which must be respected. This does not mean, however, that the fight to improve Indonesian democracy will stop.
Not Absolute
=Todung accepts the Constitutional Court’s decision with several notes that must be fought for to uphold democracy in Indonesia going forward and to ensure elections are conducted honestly and fairly.=
According to Todung, the presence of 3 Constitutional Court judges who gave a dissenting opinion in the election dispute decision implies that the victory of Candidate Pair 2, Prabowo Subianto and Gibran Rakabuming Raka, is not absolute.
The three constitutional judges who issued dissenting opinions are Judges Saldi Isra, Enny Nurbaningsih, and Arief Hidayat.
“If you talk about 3 MK judges against 5, then this decision does not give a full mandate to Prabowo-Gibran for their victory in the 2024 Presidential Election. So, their victory is not absolute,” Todung explained.
He noted that the dissenting judges highlighted issues of fairness and justice, ethical breaches, procedural violations, and administrative violations in the 2024 election issues.
Additionally, there were comments about the distribution of social assistance, which needs clearer rules. “Saldi Isra and Enny Nurbaningsih said there needs to be comprehensive regulations regarding the distribution of social assistance so it does not become a power tool that benefits certain candidates,” said Todung.
These notes, he continued, underscore that the Constitutional Court judges’ opinions strengthen the claims made by Candidate Pair 3 in their election dispute petition Number 2 concerning President Joko Widodo and the Cabinet of Indonesia Maju clearly benefiting Candidate Pair 2 in the 2024 Presidential Election.
He also noted about the resolution of election-related cases at the Constitutional Court regarding structured, systematic, and massive (TSM) violations which are time-restricted to only 14 days.
“This must be changed by lawmakers, because the Constitutional Court is limited by such a short time to judge election dispute cases. However, proving TSM violations requires a sufficiently long time,” Todung remarked.
Furthermore, the Ganjar-Mahfud Legal Team also noted the Constitutional Court judges’ opinion that elections must be conducted equally for all participants.
“There must be equal standing among all candidate pairs, so any form of support from powers for certain candidates is not allowed. This is our note for lawmakers to regulate in the Election Law,” Todung disclosed. (kba)