Arief Budiman, Who Was Kicked Out Of The Chair Of The KPU Because He Was Considered To Be Against The DKPP Decision

Chairman of the General Election Commission of the Republic of Indonesia, Arief Budiman. (Wardhany Tsa Tsia / VOI)

JAKARTA - Yesterday, Wednesday, January 13, the Honorary Council of Election Administrators (DKPP) held a court verdict on the case with the chairman of the Indonesian General Election Commission, Arief Budiman. As a result, DKPP dismissed Arief Budiman from his position as KPU.

This case was filed by a man named Jupri with an entrepreneurial background. Jupri sued Arief to DKPP because Arief was deemed to have violated the code of ethics as Chairman of the KPU.

Initially, DKPP stopped Evi Novida Ginting Manik for violating the election organizer's code of ethics. The ratification of Evi's termination is stated in President Jokowi's Decree Number 34 / P of 2020.

Evi then sued Jokowi's SK to the Jakarta State Administrative Court. During the trial registration on April 17, 2020, Arief was present to accompany Evi as an individual who provided moral support.

In addition, Arief was also sued for allegedly exceeding his authority, namely issuing the RI KPU letter Number 663 / SDM.13-SD / 05 / KPU / VIII / 2020, on August 18, 2020.

In reading the court's decision, the Chairman of DKPP Muhammad said that his party partially granted Jupri's request. DKPP dismissed Arief from the position of Chairman of the KPU.

"Imposing the final harsh warning sanctions and dismissal from the position of Chairman of the KPU to defendant Arief Budiman as Chairman of the Indonesian KPU," said the Chairman of the DKPP, Muhammad in a court decision broadcast on YouTube DKPP RI, Wednesday, January 13.

Continuing, DKPP member Didik Supriyanto said that his party understood Arief's recognition that his presence was merely to provide moral support, sympathy, and empathy based on a sense of humanity as an individual because he had long been friends with Evi.

"However, emotional ties should not close or kill the sense of ethics in carrying out individual personal activities because the defendant (Arief) is attached to the position of chairman of the KPU who is concurrently a KPU member who has no emotional ties with anyone except the legal provisions and ethics of the position as organizer. election, "said Didik in the DKPP decision hearing.

In his position, according to Didik, Arief should not have been trapped in emotional acts in placing himself in the public sphere. This, he said, had the implication of being insubordinate and disrespecting the DKPP decision which dismissed Evi from his position.

"The presence of the defendant at every opportunity in the public space to accompany sister Evi in her efforts to fight for her rights causes the KPU to appear as an institution as the main supporter in fighting against the DKPP decision," he explained.

Furthermore, Arief was also considered to have no legal or ethical basis when he issued Letter Number 663 / SDM.12-SD / 05 / KPU / VIII / 2020. This letter contains ordering Evi Novida Ginting Manik to become active again as a member of the Indonesian KPU when PTUN Jakarta wins Evi's lawsuit.

Didik said that the letter did not have sufficient evidence in the form of a plenary meeting minutes document or other evidence. Thus, Arief's admission that Evi's appointment was the decision of all KPU members cannot be proven.

"The Action of the Defendant is a form of abuse of authority, both in the category of exceeding authority outside the legal provisions, both in the category of mixing up authority outside the material of authority," said Didik.

Thus, Arief is deemed to have violated Article 14 letter (c) in conjunction with Article 15 letter (a) and letter e juncto Article 19 letter (c) and (e) DKPP Regulation Number 2 of 2017 concerning the Code of Ethics and Code of Conduct of Election Administrators.

Dissenting opinion

Another DKPP member who is also a KPU commissioner, Pramono Ubaid Tanthowi exercised his right in court to convey dissenting opinions or opinions that differ from the majority opinion of the DKPP panel of judges.

According to Pramono, Arief's actions in issuing a signature letter ordering Evi to return to the position as Commissioner of the KPU did not include serious violations that hurt the integrity of the process or the integrity of the election results, or ethical violations in the form of immoral acts that have often received the most severe sanctions, either in the form of permanent dismissal or dismissal from certain positions.

So, he said, Arief should not receive heavy sanctions in the form of dismissal from the position of Chairman of the KPU.

"If this action is considered as a violation, then I am of the view that Arief Budiman should not be subject to the heaviest sanctions," Pramono said.

Arief Budiman's self defense

Arief Budiman said that what he did was not an election crime, referring to Pramono's dissenting opinion.

"One thing I want to emphasize is that I have never committed violations and crimes that hurt the integrity of the elections," Arief told reporters.

In the dismissal decision, DKPP ordered the KPU to follow up on the decision. Arief said that his party was still waiting for a copy of the decision to be studied. After receiving a copy, the KPU will hold a plenary meeting by all the commissioners.

"We have not received the hard copy (copy of the decision). So we wait, we learn, then what will we do later," said Arief.