Kaesang Affirms PSI Supports Prabowo Coalition Whatever The Results Of The Constitutional Court's Decree

JAKARTA - Chairman of the Indonesian Solidarity Party (PSI) Kaesang Pangarep emphasized that his party still supports the Forward Indonesia Coalition (KIM) in the 2024 General Election whatever the decision of the Constitutional Court Honorary Council (MKMK) decision.

The Constitutional Court held a series of hearings for alleged violations of the code of ethics of the Constitutional Court (MK) regarding alleged violations of the code of ethics in the Case Decision Number 90/PUU-XXI/2023 which changed the terms of the presidential and vice presidential candidates to a minimum of 40 years and added that the clause had served as regional head.

"Nothing has changed (the vice presidential candidate), we remain in KIM. Want to change (or) not change, we remain (at KIM)," said Kaesang on Jalan Purification Dalam, Central Jakarta, Thursday, November 2, confiscated by Antara.

As a result of the results of the MKMK trial, decisions related to the terms of the presidential and vice presidential candidates for the 2024 presidential election have the potential to change.

Previously, changes to the requirements of the presidential and vice-presidential candidates in the decision allowed Gibran Rakabuming Raka, who is also Kaesang Pangarep's older brother, to be the vice presidential candidate accompanying Prabowo Subianto's presidential candidate.

According to Kaesang, PSI has committed to supporting KIM who carries Prabowo Subianto-Gibran Rakabuming Raka regardless of the Constitutional Court's decision.

"Nothing has changed (the vice presidential candidate), we have committed to Prabowo," said Kaesang.

Previously, MKMK Chairman Jimly Asshiddiqie mentioned 10 issues related to alleged violations of the Constitutional Court judge's code of ethics during the reporting examination on Tuesday, October 31 to Wednesday, November 1.

One of them, the public reported that the Constitutional Court judge did not resign in a case related to his family members.

The Constitutional Court judge was also reported for speaking in public regarding the substance of the matter in the case being examined.