The Constitutional Court Rejects The Term Of Office Of The 10 Year Political Party Chairman

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court (MK) rejected the request for judicial review of Article 2 paragraph (1b) and 23 paragraph (1) of Law Number 2 of 2011 concerning Amendments to Law Number 2 of 2008 concerning Political Parties.

"The verdict: adjudicating, stating that the petitioners' petition is unacceptable," said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Anwar Usman when reading the verdict at the Constitutional Court building as reported by ANTARA, Wednesday, August 30.

The Constitutional Court in its consideration stated that after the Court carefully observed the petitioners' petition, especially in the part of the matters requested to be decided (petitum), which in essence requested that the Court state Article 2 paragraph (1b) of the Political Party Law, The founder and administrator of the Political Party are prohibited from concurrently serving as members of another Political Party.

This is considered contrary to the 1945 Constitution and does not have binding legal force as long as it is not interpreted, Armed and Political Party Management is prohibited from holding concurrent positions as members of other political parties, and Political Party Management holds office for 5 (five) years and can only be re-elected 1 (one) time in the same position, either in a row or non-consecutive manner".

"Against the petitum a quo, after the Court observed it turned out that Article 2 paragraph (1b) of Law 2/2011 was part of Chapter II concerning the Establishment of Political Parties. Meanwhile, the problems requested by the Petitioners were part of Chapter IX regarding Management," said Constitutional Justice Daniel Yusmic reading out the Constitutional Court's legal considerations.

If the Court follows the wishes of the Petitioners to give a new meaning to the norms of Article 2 paragraph (1b) of Law 2/2011, continued Daniel, the new meaning is not part of the norms governing the formation of political parties.

"If the new applied meaning is contained in Chapter II, whether it is realized or not, it will change the structure and substance regulated in Chapter II," he said.

Daniel continued, the new meaning is increasingly difficult to justify because the Petitioners want political party officials to hold positions for 5 (five) years and can only be re-elected 1 (one) time in the same position, either in a row or in a row.

This shows that there is a conflict between the reasons for submitting applications (posita) and the things requested (petitum), as is the relationship between posita and petitum which is regulated in Article 74 of Constitutional Court Regulation Number 2 of 2021 concerning Procedures for Certificates in Law Testing Cases.

"Therefore, the petitioners' petition is unclear (disbursed)," said Daniel.

Application Number 75/PUU-XXI/2023 in the case of testing Law Number 2 of 2011 concerning Amendments to Law Number 2 of 2008 concerning Political Parties (UU Political Parties) was proposed by three Papuans named Muhammad Helmi Fahrizi, E. Ramos Petege, and Leonardus O. Magai.

The Petitioners questioned the norms of Article 2 paragraph (1b) of the Election Law which stated, "Constructors and administrators of political parties are prohibited from concurrently serving as members of other political parties".

In the preliminary examination trial held at the Constitutional Court on Thursday (27/7), the Petitioners through Rustina Haryati's attorney said that the provisions of Article 2 paragraph (1b) of the Political Party Law should be given a clear, complete, and comprehensive meaning.

In essence, apart from not being concurrently a member of another political party, the leader of a political party must also limit his term of office to a certain periodization of time to ensure legal certainty and justice for members of a political party to contribute and contribute to the progress of the political party where he belongs.

According to the Petitioners, the absence of restrictions on the term of office of political party leaders in Article 2 paragraph (1b) of the Political Party Law creates the absence of equal opportunities for members of political parties to become leaders/managers of political parties guaranteed in Article 1 paragraph (3), Article 27 paragraph (1), and Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

"Article 2 paragraph (1) of Law 2/2011 allows the process of selecting regeneration and replacement of the general chairman, leaders and administrators of political parties to only be hung on the provisions of the AD/ART," he said.

For this reason, in the petitum, the Petitioners ask the Constitutional Court to state that Article 2 paragraph (1b) of the Election Law is contrary to the 1945 Constitution and does not have binding legal force throughout the life of the founders and administrators of political parties are determined for five years and can be re-elected once in the same term, either in a row or in a row.