The Constitutional Court Decides Not To Accept The PHPU Lawsuit For The PPP Dapil East Java Legislative Election

MK/DOK PHOTO Building: Diah Ayu-VOI

JAKARTA - The Constitutional Court (MK) has decided not to accept the lawsuit or application for the 2024 Legislative Election PHPU case proposed by the United Development Party (PPP) for the East Java (East Java) electoral district.

The application is registered with number 112-01-17-15/PHPU.DPR-DPRD-XXII/2024. Valid as the applicant is PPP and as the respondent party is KPU.

"Declaring that the Petitioner's application is unacceptable," said Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court Suhartoyo in a plenary session at the Constitutional Court building, Jakarta, as reported by ANTARA, Wednesday, May 22.

In the Constitutional Court's explanation, Constitutional Justice Saldi Isra said PPP argued that the party's transfer of votes was in the East Java 1 electoral district, East Java 4, East Java 6 electoral district, and East Java 8 electoral district.

"The petitioner argued that in the four electoral districts there was an illegal transfer of votes to the Garuda Party with a total of 21,812 votes," said Suhartoyo.

However, he continued, PPP did not explain clearly and in detail how the transfer of votes was carried out, who was the party or person who turned the vote, and when the vote was made.

The Constitutional Court also found that there was a conflicting formulation of petitum in the first case and the second case included in the application.

"In the first case petitum, the Petitioner asked for the determination of the number of votes, while in the second case petitum, the Petitioner asked for a re-vote, even though the electoral districts in the two cases were the same or at least intersecting, namely the East Java 4 electoral district," he said.

However, he said, after PPP withdrew the second case, namely the reduction in votes for the Lucita Izza Rafika candidate in the East Java electoral district, there was no longer any inter-petum conflict.

"Based on such legal considerations, the Court assessed that the Petitioner's petition was included in the category of requests for escape (libel obscuur)," Suhartoyo said.

The Panel of Judges also stated that the KPU's exception, which basically stated that the PPP's request was unclear or vague, was to reason according to the law and grant the exception.

Constitutional Justice Arsul Sani used his rebuttal rights, because of his status as a politician from the party bearing the Kaaba symbol.