THE ROLE of the Constitutional Court (MK) in handling General Election Results Dispute Requests (PHPU) should not be reduced to just adjudicating vote differences. This statement was conveyed by Cyril Raoul Hakim or familiarly known as Chico Hakim, as spokesperson for Candidate Pair (Paslon) number 3, Ganjar Pranowo and Mahfud MD (Ganjar-Mahfud), in Jakarta, Thursday (28/3).
According to him, with the rolling out of the PHPU Application from candidate pair number 3 and candidate pair number 1 regarding the 2024 Election results which have been announced by the General Election Commission (KPU), all parties must provide space for the MK without limiting the broad authority of this institution in accordance with the constitution.
“Don’t underestimate the role of the Constitutional Court. In my opinion, if we talk about the Constitutional Court it is only testing voting disputes, why are there such great judges chosen from there,” said Chico.
He explained that the Constitutional Court has broad authority, including in handling PHPU requests which are not limited to just questioning the difference in votes. In principle, the Constitutional Court has the authority to judge whether the election process was held according to the principles of direct, general, free and confidential, as well as honest and fair.
Apart from that, the decision of the Constitutional Court is final and cannot be compared, so that in deciding cases there are of course many considerations and legal bases that become the benchmark, not just the dispute over election results.
“So it all depends on how we view and position the MK. For the Ganjar-Mahfud team, we view the MK as the Guardian of democracy, he is the guardian of our democracy, secondly he is the guardian of our constitution,” said Chico.
Also read: KPU Prepares Answers to Candidate Candidates Anies-Cak Imin and Ganjar-Mahfud MD at the Constitutional Court
Based on this view, he continued, the Ganjar-Mahfud legal team considered that the Constitutional Court had the authority to try all those related to constitutional violations, including the implementation of elections.
This is also the basis for the Ganjar-Mahfud legal team to submit a PHPU application to the Constitutional Court to prove that the 2024 Election issue is not just a matter of vote difference, but that there are structured, systematic and massive (TSM) violations that color the election process or stages.
“We see that the big picture of this election is not just about the vote results, just the difference in numbers, but how this process occurs. We call it TSM, of course it is a series of events which then influence the election results,” said Chico.
Also read: Immediately sue the Constitutional Court, Ganjar: Already verified the report from the public
He deeply regrets the emergence of opinions that reduce or limit the Constitutional Court’s authority in adjudicating PHPU requests, as if it cannot be separated from the issue of election results that have been determined by the KPU.
Even the legal action taken by candidate pair 03 by submitting a PHPU application to the Constitutional Court was considered a method by parties who did not accept defeat.
Not only that, Ganjar-Mahfud was also said to be unfit to submit a PHPU application to the Constitutional Court because they had a vote difference of more than 40% with candidate pair number 2, Prabowo Subianto and Gibran Rakabuming Raka.
Also read: TPN Ganjar Pranowo-Mahfud MD Prepares Presidential Election Dispute Lawsuit to the Constitutional Court
“We submitted a PHPU application to the Constitutional Court because we realized that there was a problem in the election that could not be ignored. That’s why we brought this issue to the Constitutional Court because there are judges who have extensive legal knowledge, they are able to carry out interpretations of the law, which may we can’t do it,” said Chico.
He explained that in principle, TSM’s alleged violations in the implementation of the 2024 elections which Ganjar-Mahfud sued the Constitutional Court were related to several issues.
“Talking about structured, systematic and massive matters, what we brought to the Constitutional Court the key words for the lawsuit were nepotism, abuse of power, and violations committed by election organizers starting from the registration of presidential candidates, to the recapitulation process,” said Chico.
Also read: Responding to Ganjar Pranowo-Mahfud MD’s lawsuit regarding TSM violations, KPU: Should be in Bawaslu
Abuse of Power
Regarding abuse of power, he continued, the Ganjar-Mahfud legal team saw it in the form of a policy carried out by politicizing social assistance (bansos) which was seen from four aspects.
First, from the time aspect regarding social assistance, President Joko Widodo (Jokowi) instructed to accelerate the disbursement of social assistance funds so that it coincides with the 2024 presidential election process.
Second, in terms of the amount of social assistance, President Jokowi increased social protection funds for social assistance massively to reach 496.8 trillion, only a slight difference from the budget disbursed during the peak of Covid-19.
Also read: Mahfud MD asks the Constitutional Court to work independently to save democracy and law
Third, from the aspect of social assistance recipients, it is carried out with the main target of areas where the electability of candidate pair number 2 is still lagging behind, such as in several places in Central Java and East Java.
“Well, we will prove this, so whatever is said, wherever it is, we will reveal it at the Constitutional Court,” said Chico.
Fourth, from the distribution aspect, President Jokowi ensured that the majority of social assistance distribution was carried out by himself and state officials who were part of the coalition supporting Candidate Pair Number 2 without involving the Minister of Social Affairs.
Also read: At the Constitutional Court Session, Anies Highlights Government Intervention, Social Assistance and Anwar Usman
“Another thing related to social assistance abuse of power is the deployment of officers, the use of police officers through pressure on village officials and also related to public complaints to people who are critical of the implementation of the election and of election fraud,” said Chico.
He added that when talking about democracy in holding elections, what Ganjar-Mahfud did was not just about the results, but went far beyond that.
“We are fighting for our democracy in the future, because we want this country to run according to the democratic corridor that we have chosen through reform,” said Chico.
He added that Ganjar-Mahfud did not question who won and lost, but challenged the issue of holding elections which were full of TSM violations to restore honest and fair democracy for everyone in all regions of the Republic of Indonesia. (Dis/Z-7)
#TPN #GanjarMahfud #Dont #Minimize #MKs #Role #Adjudicate #Voting #Differences