JAKARTA (TheInsiderStories) – The inaugural session of the Constitutional Court on Friday marked a legal battle between the two camps competing in the 2019 presidential election. Tensions will remain high in the courtroom when the battle begins tomorrow Tuesday (06/18), seen from a hard exchange between their respective lawyers and General Election Commissions (GEC).
However, the responsibility will be on Prabowo Subianto’s – Sandiaga Salahuddin Uno legal team to maintain the focus on proving their case, which has been considered by the Former Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court, Mahfud MD, to be eligible for review.
Mahfud explains that the application received does not mean that the opposition request will be granted by the Constitutional Court judge. The dispute petition claim by Constitutional Court means that the dispute petition fulfills the requirements for further investigation. He also said the request or claim would be acceptable.
He added that from many requests and evidence, some could be accepted as facts and some were rejected. The decision of the Constitutional Court judge depends on the comparison of requests received and rejected.
While Constitutional Law Expert Refly Harun said that 99.99 percent of the opposition requests would be rejected by the Constitutional Court. Harun analysis is based on if the Constitutional Court judges put forward two paradigms, namely calculations and structured, systematic and massive in the dispute over the 2019 Presidential Election.
Harun explained in the calculation paradigm, judges would definitely need a long time to examine the evidence attached to the applicant’s party. The deadline for 14 working days is considered not enough to describe 272 containers of evidence submitted by the General Election Commissions, as the respondent.
Whereas if the Constitutional Court judge uses a structured, systematic and massive paradigm that is cumulative, then the end is the same as the previous paradigm. When using this paradigm, the game is finished.
Currently, Subianto has used the help of the former head of the Corruption Eradication Commission Bambang Widjojanto, who in 2010 succeeded in canceling the results of regional head elections where the winning candidates won the election with a difference of 10 percent of the vote.
For the record, Joko Widodo-Ma’ruf Amin won the 2019 Presidential Election with the acquisition of 55.5 percent of the votes, or 11 percent more than the votes obtained by Subianto-Uno.
At the pre-trial hearing on Friday last week, Widjojanto outlined their case and asked the Constitutional Court to, among others: First, canceling the results of the 2019 Presidential Election and Pileg which took place on the same day April 17, 2019, based on allegations of election fraud that occurred in several provinces.
Second, stating that Subianto-Uno won the 2019 presidential election with 52 percent of the vote, based on their claim that “the number of votes given appropriately,” compared to the acquisition of 48 percent of the votes by Widodo-Amin.
Third, disqualifying Widodo-Amin because of allegations of fraud in the election and other campaign violations which are said to be carried out in a “structural, systematic and massive manner.”
Fourth, instruct the GEC to rerun elections “in an honest and fair manner” throughout Indonesia, or at least in what the Subianto team claimed to be a number of provinces affected by fraud, such as West Java, Central Java, East Java, Banten, Jakarta, North Sumatra, South Sumatra, Lampung, Central Sulawesi, South Sulawesi, Papua, and Central Kalimantan.
Fifth, asking the GEC to reassign the voter list and conduct an audit of the online vote counting information system.
In the coming days, Widjojanto and his team must provide detailed evidence to support their arguments and convince the Constitutional Court to grant their list of demands.
As with all trials in court, the trial at the Constitutional Court will not run in one direction. Widjojanto along with the evidence presented by his team will be faced with a panel of experts from Widodo’s team as well as lawyers acting on behalf of the GEC.
Some observers say that based on these allegations, Subianto-Uno’s lawyer must also prove that the GEC is a systematic party involved in electoral fraud allegedly committed by their opponents.
If they succeed in proving that, with all the evidence said they are adequate, it is not impossible that the opposition will win the dispute this time, the results are different after in 2014 Subianto lost.
While a fiery exchange will take place in a high-risk legal contest this time, all parties will be given a fair chance by the Constitutional Court, led by Chief Justice Anwar Usman.
The decision by the nine-judge panel of the Constitutional Court, which is final and legally binding, is expected to be released on June 28, 2019.
Written by Willy Matrona, Email: firstname.lastname@example.org