Anies Refuses To Immediately Respond To The Constitutional Court's Decision: Give Us Time

Presidential Candidate number 1 Anies Baswedan after attending the 2024 presidential election dispute decision hearing at the Constitutional Court, Monday 22 April. (Rizky A-VOI)

JAKARTA - Anies Baswedan was reluctant to comment on the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) regarding the 2024 Presidential Election dispute (Pilpres).

The Constitutional Court is known to reject all arguments in the lawsuit of the Anies-Muaimin Iskandar or Cak Imim camp.

"Give us time to prepare a few points which will later be our response to our decision," Anies told reporters at the Constitutional Court, Monday, April 22.

The presidential candidate number one also said that he would give a response regarding the decision this afternoon. However, it has not been confirmed about the time.

"So this afternoon we will give a statement regarding the decision," said Anies.

The Constitutional Court decided to reject the requests of the Anies Baswedan and Muhaimin Iskandar camps regarding the Dispute over the General Election Results (PHPU) of the President and Vice President 2024.

"Reject the applicant's application in its entirety," said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Suhartoyo.

The Anies-Cak Imin camp is known to have submitted a request for the Constitutional Court to disqualify Gibran Rakabuming Raka on the grounds of a violation.

In addition, the presidential and vice-presidential candidates number 1 also suspect that there was a violation behind the distribution of social assistance, as well as President Joko Widodo (Jokowi).

However, the Court considered that the arguments submitted by the applicant were not based on law.

The Constitutional Court also emphasized that the decision handed down by the a quo court was a decision that was deemed appropriate based on legal evidence and facts in the trial and had complied with the principles of law and justice in accordance with Article 24 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

Meanwhile, in this decision, there are three constitutional judges who state dissenting opinions. Namely, Saldi Isra, Enny Nurbaningsih, and Arief Hidayat.