Want Political Parties Without DPRD Seats Can Promote Regional Heads, Labor Parties And Gelora To Sue The Pilkada Law To The Constitutional Court

Attorney For The Labor Party And Gelora Party, Said Salahudin/PHOTO: Diah Ayu-VOI

JAKARTA - The Labor Party and the Gelora Party officially submitted a judicial review of Law Number 10 of 2016 concerning Pilkada to the Constitutional Court.

The attorney for the Labor Party and the Gelora Party, Said Salahudin, said that the rules being challenged were Article 40 paragraph (3) which determines that the nomination in the regional elections can only be carried out by political parties (political parties) or coalitions of political parties that have seats in the DPRD.

Meanwhile, according to Said, political parties that received votes in the 2024 General Election but did not get DPRD seats, were not given the right to participate in proposing candidate pairs.

"This rule is certainly unfair because it contradicts the principles of election justice and also the similarities between political parties participating in the 2024 General Election," Said said at the Constitutional Court building, Tuesday, May 21.

Said assessed that Article 40 paragraph (3) of the Pilkada Law contradicts at least six principles regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Among them are the principles of people's sovereignty; the principle of law; the principle of regional election democracy; the principle of equality before the law; the principle of collective rights to build society, nation and state; as well as the principle of fair legal certainty.

Said believes this lawsuit will be granted and decided quickly by the Constitutional Court before the entry of the registration stage for the candidate pair on August 27-29, 2024.

"So, in the application of the Labor Party and the Gelora Party, we are sure that the Constitutional Court will immediately submit a decision through one or two trials without the need to listen to the information from the DPR and the Government which is not mandatory for the Constitutional Court," he explained.