Legal Expert: MK Counts Differences In Not Distribution Of Social Assistance

Photo Antara

JAKARTA - Constitutional Law expert Abdul Chair Ramadhan said the authority of the Constitutional Court (MK) calculated the difference in votes in the election vote dispute case, not the distribution of social assistance.

"The Constitutional Court is bound by the provisions of Law Number 17 of 2017 concerning General Elections, in Article 457 Paragraph (2) which states that the Constitutional Court has the authority to decide cases of disputes in votes," he said in a written statement in Jakarta, Sunday.

The general chairman of the Indonesian Law Postgraduate Doctors Association explained that the social assistance disbursed by the government was in accordance with the mechanism, it had nothing to do with elections.

This was conveyed by Abdul regarding allegations of misuse of social assistance in the 2024 presidential election by the legal team of the presidential candidate pair (candidate) and vice presidential candidate (cawapres) number 1 Anies Baswedan-Muhaimin Iskandar and serial number 3 Ganjar Pranowo-Mahfud MD, which were considered to be in favor of Prabowo Subianto-Gibran Rakabuming Raka.

"Therefore, the allegation is that it includes or is classified as a violation of election administration which is carried out systematically and massively (TSM) into the domain of Bawaslu, not the domain of the Constitutional Court's authority. That is clear the provisions," he asserted.

He continued, the provisions are the standard or absolute competence, where it can be known in Article 460 in conjunction with 463 of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections, regulating the competencies possessed by Bawaslu, then also Bawaslu Regulation Number 8 of 2022, precisely in Article 12 which has determined the authority of Bawaslu.

Abdul continued, it would be natural if the legal team number 2 Prabowo-Gibran said the lawsuits were 1 and 3 "wrong rooms". The error points to an error in filing a lawsuit that is not in place.

"Thus there is no opportunity to expand or interpret other powers of the Constitutional Court in terms of vote counting. Argumentum a contrario or in fiqh science called mafhum mukhlafah, then apart from vote counting it is not under the authority of the Constitutional Court," he explained.

According to Abdul, it is clear that the authority of the Constitutional Court is only on the results of vote counting with a quantitative approach. The Constitutional Court is not authorized to try administrative violations of elections, especially TSM, whose approach is qualitative in fact.

"The justice is carried out proportionally, placing something according to its place. Placing disputes against violations of the TSM election administration to the Constitutional Court are not in its place, that is the place for Bawaslu to examine, decide. As for counting the votes of presidential and vice presidential candidates, it is only the authority of the Constitutional Court," he asserted.