Many parties welcomed the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) which granted the lawsuit to reduce the parliamentary threshold from 4% to 0%. Prof. Dr. H. Jimly Asshiddiqie, SH., MH., welcomed this positively. According to him, the Constitutional Court must then lower the presidential threshold from 20% to 0%. Many alternative presidential candidates will emerge when the threshold is lowered.

***

The post-reform implementation of the parliamentary threshold (PT) came into effect after the 2009 election. At that time, the parliamentary threshold was set at 2.5% of valid national votes. In the 2004 election, that percentage rose to 3.5%, and in the 2019 election it peaked at 4%. One of the goals of this parliamentary threshold is to simplify the number of political parties entering the DPR RI, but at the same time make many valid electoral votes unused, or wasteful.

That's why many parties have submitted a judicial review to the Constitutional Court regarding this parliamentary threshold. And recently the Constitutional Court granted a judicial review regarding the parliamentary threshold being 0%. Many parties welcomed this decision, including Jimly Asshiddiqie, Professor of Constitutional Law, University of Indonesia (UI).

Furthermore, he said, the presidential threshold must also be lowered. "Hopefully the Constitutional Court judges will learn from this case. The parliamentary threshold has been decided. We are waiting for the presidential threshold to also be lowered. It's best if there is a test, just grant it. So that the Constitutional Court is not judged for inconsistency," he said.

By lowering the presidential threshold, he continued, many presidential candidates will emerge. "It's not just dominated by certain political parties and certain tribes. So far, Javanese have most often become president. Next could be Sundanese and other tribes. After that, Palembang people, hehehe. To the Papuan people, I say you also have the right to become a presidential candidate," said Jimly, who recently received an invitation as an observer in the Russian presidential election.

To Edy Suherli, Bambang Eros, and Irfan Medianto from VOI who visited Jimly Asshiddiqie at his residence in Pondok Labu, South Jakarta recently, he also talked about the dynamics of the 2024 presidential and legislative elections, the right to inquiry, state political ethics, and dynastic politics.

How do you see the 2024 election process?

Thank God, our election this time went smoothly. Indeed, there was tension before the voting and after the voting, there was also tension during the counting, both the quick count and the manual count which is still ongoing. While the 2019 presidential election was characterized by identity politics, now the situation is relatively fluid. At that time one of the candidates was the incumbent (Jokowi). In my opinion, 2019 was also more complicated, there were 894 KPPS officers who died.

Now the president is not running or campaigning even though he is allowed to. In America, Barack Obama also campaigned in support of Hillary Clinton from the Democratic party. In this election there are two issues that are very exciting and the most widely discussed, namely the ethics of the state and public officials and dynastic politics. Never before in history has it been discussed with all the anger and emotion it is now. There are those who accuse other people of being unethical, but they don't realize it when they accuse three of their fingers pointing at themselves.

This question of dynastic politics is interesting, why are so many people paying attention to it?

Currently, almost all political parties implement dynastic politics. There are those who defend themselves, dynastic politics must be separated between political parties and the state. In fact, one of the pillars of democracy is political parties. So there is something called external democracy and internal democracy. If a political party wants to be called democratic, there must be democracy within the political party. The father who became chairman of the political party was replaced by his son, is that not a practice of dynastic politics? If there is no democracy within a political party, there is no need to talk about democracy in a broader scope; statehood.

Jokowi in the context of this political dynasty is perceived as carrying out dynastic politics. He was accused of designing his son to run in the presidential election. Placed his son as chairman of a political party (PSI), his son and son-in-law became Mayor. People are increasingly angry because of President Jokowi's alleged political dynasty practices.

Do we have any ethics in politics?

As I said earlier, there has never been anyone so angry about the issue of dynastic politics and political ethics in this country. For the last 10 years I have been a promoter (for students taking doctoral level). I have also written a book about the importance of rules of ethics, ethics in the nation and state, and the rule of law. In several books, I emphasize that Pancasila and our Constitution are not only the supreme source of law but also the supreme source of ethics. So both are the sources of all sources of norms; ethics and law.

So now I think we have momentum for future improvements, in modernizing political culture and structuring the ethical system of the nation and state. This explains Pancasila and the 1995 Constitution and MPR Decree No. 6/2001 concerning Ethics in National Life. No need to blame each other, just correct yourself. There were many who were emotional, there were professors, former generals, former ministers, experts, senior journalists and so on.

Facing a phenomenon like this, how do we behave?

Let's just observe and enjoy, don't get carried away by the flow of feelings and emotions. It's like people playing chess, those who play we don't need to be emotional. The term said now, don't get too excited (hard feelings). My suggestion is that we accept the results of this election regardless of the pluses and minuses.

Not all parties can immediately accept it, are there political parties that will use the right of inquiry to question alleged election violations?

Please if anyone wants something like that. So his disappointment and dissatisfaction was channeled. Later it will be divided into two, there are those who use the right of inquiry, and there are those who use the Constitutional Court route. Previously, what was determined was that in the Constitutional Court, the winner could be determined to be the winner and the loser could be the winner. In the DPR (via the right of inquiry) it is only political pressure. In the DPR you cannot change the results of an election from a winner to a loser and a loser to a winner. In the context of the election, the highest judge is at the TPS.

Now the one who is making a fuss is the party who lost, and several members of the DPR who were not re-elected for the next term, there are personal interests here. Those who win are 58% silent. So this right to inquiry is legal and it is the DPR's right, please use it without being obstructed.

So the right of inquiry regarding elections that will be rolled out by DPR members cannot influence the election results?

Can't. The end of the right to inquiry is law enforcement. If anyone violates the implementation of the election, it will be processed legally. The court will decide what the punishment will be. Those suspected of violating election crimes can be summoned by the inquiry rights committee, including the president. For example, if they think the president has violated it, first look at what the violation is. For the president, there are 4 criteria for violations that can be used as a tool for impeachment; one betrayed the country. Two, accepting bribes. Third; corruption. And the fourth committed other serious crimes which carry a threat of more than five years.

If the committee can prove Jokowi guilty, then there will be a legal process. If he still serves as president, the mechanism is impeachment. But if you are no longer president, general criminal penalties apply. The results of the questionnaire were followed by statements of opinion from the factions. Then submitted to the Constitutional Court for proof. After that, it was brought by the DPR to the MPR. This process could take more than a year, while Jokowi's remaining term in office is only seven months. So impeachment cannot possibly happen, there is not enough time.

Do you see that members of the DPR and existing factions are serious about using the right to inquiry this time?

There are two PDIP attitudes that I noted. PDIP Chair Megawati welcomes the use of the right of inquiry but not to the point of impeachment. This is a very clear direction. So focus on alleged election violations. Djarot Saiful Hidayat's statement regarding the questionnaire had no direction from the party, everything was left to the creativity of PDIP members in the DPR RI. So PDIP is not too enthusiastic. Moreover, if there is a post-questionnaire, changes that would benefit the most from candidate pair 01, why should candidate pair 03 be enthusiastic. So this will just be a questionnaire, it has to be seen whether there are enough votes or not to continue with the initiative and to the plenary session. Apart from that, this questionnaire is only to investigate and reveal facts. Ultimately, law enforcement.

In fact, rather than bothering with the right of inquiry, it is more concrete to handle cases at Bawaslu, if there are allegations of election crimes, they will be processed in district court. Even if there are TNI members who commit criminal election violations, they will be tried by a military court. If it concerns the election process, it is tried in Bawaslu, as a quasi-trial court. He can decide who is in violation. If you are not satisfied, you can take it to the State Administrative High Court, not to the Supreme Court. Questions regarding the results of the general election and presidential election are tried at the Constitutional Court. Just prepare sufficient evidence.

While the DPR is still discussing the right to inquiry, the DPD has already inaugurated a special committee on alleged election violations, does the DPD have the right to investigate like the DPR through the right to inquiry?

DPD has authority in matters of regional government, matters related to regional government. But it could be expanded, because many DPD members are not re-elected. They have interests too, the decision is not binding and coercive, it only supports the DPR's right to inquiry. But if asked whether it is permissible or not, DPD members want to express their opinions, convey the aspirations of their constituents.

Several parties have raised allegations of election fraud, the most attention of which is the documentary film Dirty Vote, how do you see this reality?

I think it is good for the experts who express their opinions so that the public is not dominated by just one opinion. So the public's way of thinking is not hegemonic with many different interpretations and opinions. It cannot be claimed as the truth. For state decisions that are binding are the results or decisions of the Constitutional Court. Individual opinions do not apply even if he is a professor. The documentary films Dirty Vote are the same, these are Dirty Propaganda, and Dirty Mind. What is being done is propaganda. They are line 04, or as long as they are not 02. What they are doing through this Dirty Vote campaign is to corner candidate pair 02. The same thing is being done by professors who are busy expressing their stance. Actually, that can be questioned, because the regulations in the law strictly prohibit campaigning from using educational facilities and places of worship.

In social and political science there is nothing objective, only inter-subjectivity. The only objective ones are natural or exact sciences. So there is no need to claim that he is the most correct in the world of politics.

If violations are found, for example, at certain polling stations, can this affect the election results?

Whatever the number, if only 1 percent cannot overturn the election results. During the 2005 regional elections in Depok, Badrul Kamal (Golkar) competed with Nur Mahmudi (PKS). Because he did not accept defeat, Badrun looked for evidence of the alleged violation. He found that 15 TPS had violations. But that could not negate the victory of Nur Mahmudi, whose voice was much bigger. So fraud in one polling station cannot be generalized to all polling stations. Likewise with the current presidential and legislative elections, if violations are proven, the results of all elections cannot be generalized.

Fraud or violations occur between parties using the "hands" of election organizers, and within parties; Candidates with the first serial number were arguing when their number of votes was higher than serial number 3 or 5. At the DPD there were also arguments between the participants and the election organizers. Massive yes, if it is structured and systematic and let alone controlled by the president, it is impossible. This perception occurred, as a result of Jokowi's son running for vice presidential candidate. Our country is very vast. What is proven is that TSM was once in an area, the Constitutional Court once decided that the winner was the loser because it was proven that TSM.

By making the decision on the parliamentary threshold from 4% to 0% but on the other hand not changing the decision regarding the presidential threshold of 20%, the Constitutional Court is considered inconsistent, what is your opinion on this?

Hopefully the Constitutional Court judges will learn from this case. The parliamentary threshold has been decided. We are waiting for the presidential threshold to also be changed. It's best if there is a test, just grant it. So that the Constitutional Court is not judged for inconsistency. By lowering the presidential threshold, many presidential candidates will emerge. Not only dominated by certain political parties and certain tribes. So far, Javanese have most often become presidents. Next could be Sundanese and other tribes. After that, Palembang people, hehehe. To the Papuan people, I say that you also have the right to become a presidential candidate.

Not long ago I was invited to be an observer in the Russian presidential election. There were 30 candidates who registered. After being selected by the KPU there, 8 people passed. During the presidential election, Vladimir Putin was elected with 76% of the vote. This means that if a figure is popular and wanted by the people, he will also be elected, without having to prevent other candidates from running in the presidential election. So it is appropriate that the presidential threshold is also zeroed.

Jimly Asshiddiqie Accidentally Became A Legal Expert, His Dream Was To Be A Diplomat Or President

It's okay for someone to have dreams in childhood and adolescence. But there's no need to be disappointed when you can't reach it halfway. That's what happened to Prof. Dr. H. Jimly Asshiddiqie, SH., MH., Professor of Constitutional Law from the University of Indonesia (UI). Initially he wanted to become a diplomat and president. However, the opportunity that existed made him study at the UI Faculty of Law in 1977-1982. Next he studied law.

He is not sad even though his dream of becoming a diplomat or president has not been achieved. "Frankly, I have no aspirations to become a legal expert or professor of Constitutional Law. However, I am grateful for what I have achieved now," said Jimly, who in 2023 was appointed as a Professor at the Faculty of Law, University of Melbourne, Australia.

He finished school at Madrasah Aliyah in the city of Palembang. "Since childhood, I have diligently corresponded with foreign radio and television such as the BBC, CNBC and also foreign embassies. Every week I receive books or bulletins from the media and embassies. From there I dreamed of becoming a diplomat," said the man born in Palembang, April 7 1956.

While in Palembang, he diligently accompanied tourists who came to his city. “I learned English while practicing when meeting tourists. Finally I can speak English fluently," said a member of the DPD RI from Jakarta for the 2019-2024 period.

After that, he took a course at the Shailendra Institute Palembang. “I entered an advanced class. Because it was considered good, I became a teacher there from 1972 to 1974. At that time Anwar Fuady was also a teacher. My students include Tantowi Yahya, Helmy Yahya and others," said Jimly, who also taught at a junior high school in the city of Palembang.

Move To Jakarta

To achieve his goals, what Jimly Asshiddiqie did was move to Jakarta in 1974. He worked at a foreign embassy in Jakarta as a translator. Apart from that, with his expertise he also teaches private English from house to house.

“I then looked for a campus to study at. Because I work, the choice is extension classes or afternoon classes. At that time, madrasa alumni like me could choose IAIN or UI, I chose UI. What was available at that time was the Faculty of Law, for the Faculty of Economics you had to have a bachelor's level. Yes, even though it wasn't my goal, I took the test. Thank God, I passed among the thousands who took part," said the former Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court who now serves as Chair of the MKMK.

Because of his intelligence in his final year of college, he was appointed as an assistant lecturer at his campus, teaching the Studia Islamika course. "For the afternoon class students, or ansor, one of them I was appointed as teaching assistant. In that morning's class, Yusril Ihza Mahendra was also a teaching assistant. I taught at the Faculty of Economics. One day, when I met the Minister of Finance, Sri Mulyani, she said that she had attended my lecture. I don't know if she didn't remind me, hehehe," said the Chairman of the Board of Trustees of the Al-Azhar Islamic Boarding School Foundation, Jakarta.

Read and Read

He advised young people to exercise diligently. “I only feel it now, because I haven't had enough exercise. Now I have to force myself to walk around 6 thousand steps in the morning. "I just have a good casing, I have a lot of disease inside," said Jimly, who was a member of the Advisory Council for the President of the Republic of Indonesia (Wantimpres RI) for Law and State Administration, 2009-2010.

Apart from that, you must be familiar with reading. “Reading textbooks and reading life around us. Observe and read what is around you. "The combination of the two will make us successful in living our lives," said Jimly, who is an avid book writer, and he has now written 68 books.

.

>

Apart from that, integrity must also be built. “We must always maintain and increase our faith and piety. Diligently read the Koran as a text and Sunnatullah as a life verse. Good mastery of science and technology, balanced with imtak. So our life will be balanced. This will maintain our integrity," said Jimly Asshiddiqie, who is also the founder of ICMI (Indonesian Muslim Scholars Association).

"Currently, almost all political parties implement dynastic politics. There are those who defend themselves, dynastic politics must be separated between political parties and the state. In fact, one of the pillars of democracy is political parties. So there is such a thing as external democracy and internal democracy. If political parties want to be called democratic, there must be democracy within the political party. The father who was chairman of the political party was replaced by his son. Is that not a practice of dynastic politics? If there is no democracy within the political party, there is no need to talk about democracy in a wider scope; statehood,"