Home Special Coverage PKPI Challenge KPU in Court Over Messy Election Registration Process

PKPI Challenge KPU in Court Over Messy Election Registration Process

Comments Off on PKPI Challenge KPU in Court Over Messy Election Registration Process
0
705

The Elections Commission (KPU) is sued by two different camps from the Indonesia Justuce and Unity Party (PKPI) over an allegation of administrative violation during political party election registration process.

During two times of hearing in the Elections Monitoring Body’s (Bawaslu) headquarter, it was revealed that there is a friction within the internal organization of PKPI which resulted in two different camps. The first camp regard Hendropriyono as the legitimate leader of the party, while the other camp regard Hari Sudarno. During the registration process, KPU only receive registration application from Hendropriyono’s camp.

“We consider Hendropriyono’s camp as the legitimate representation of PKPI because, in the official Decree issued by the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, it is stated that the chairman of PKPI is Hendropriyono, while the General Secretary is Imam Anshori Saleh,” says a KPU member, Hasyim Asy’ari, in Jakarta (11/01).

Hasyim says he is rather confused by Bawaslu’s decision to accept two different lawsuits over same allegation from a political party. According to Hasyim, one political party should be regarded as a single legal entity.

The Chairman of Bawaslu, Abhan, responds, Bawaslu will open their hands to any party that experiencing unfair treatment as long as they have clear legal standing.

PKPI’s Lawsuit Against KPU (Hendropriyono Camp’s Version)

Hendrawarman, a representative of Hendropriyono’s PKPI, says, PKPI have participated in National Elections of 1999, 2004, 2009, and 2014. In the 2014 Elections, PKPI received around 1.14 million votes and have 407 of their members elected as parliament members in many regions in Indonesia.

Through Hendrawarman, PKPI sues KPU over three allegations. First, KPU fail to provide PKPI with the receipt or proof of registration. Second, KPU’s regulation that oblige political party to conduct registration via Political Party Information System (Sipol) has no legal basis in the Elections Law. Third, KPU do not conduct proper information dissemination on how to use the Sipol.

“On October 16th, we have submitted all the required registration documents as requested by KPU. However, KPU did not give us any proof of registration. On October 21st, KPU informed us that they reject our registration application due to incomplete registration data and documents. In the hearing session, we will show the judge the complete documents that we have submitted to KPU,” says Hendrawarman.

PKPI’s Lawsuit Against KPU (Hari Sudarno Camp’s Version)

Meanwhile, Hari Sudarno’s camp of PKPI, represented by their legal adviser, Abdul Lukman Hakim, sue KPU over the fact that KPU accept registration conducted by Hendropriyono’s camp. According to Abdul, the official decree from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights, which corroborates the status of Hendropriyono as the Chairman of PKPI, has been nullified by the State Administrative Court. Therefore, Abdul says, KPU, by accepting the registration application of Hendropriyono’s camp, has deliberately ignored the State Administrative Court decision and the rule of law.

“We have received letters from KPU which states that they will ask for clarification from the Ministry of Law and Human Rights in regards with PKPI status. However, KPU does not seem to be committed in doing so,” says Abdul.

In addition, Hari Sudarno’s camp also sue KPU for their regulation on the mandatory use of Sipol for political party registration.

Did KPU Committed A Mistake?

A researcher from the Center for Constitution Study (Pusako) of Andalas University, Feri Amsari, says that KPU should have never accepted the registration application from Hendropriyono’s camp because Hendropriyono is no longer the official chairman of PKPI based on the decision issued by State Administrative Court.

“KPU should have been more careful,” says Feri (11/02).

Feri then says, the laws and judicial verdict issued by state’s court should be regarded as the legal basis for Bawaslu in making decision on the matter. Much like KPU, Feri argues, Bawaslu should be careful.

Load More Related Articles
Load More By AMALIA SALABI
Load More In Special Coverage
Comments are closed.

Check Also

Mahasiswa? Yuk Ikut Lomba Esai Literasi Digital CfDS!

Center for Digital Society (CfDS) Universitas Gadjah Mada (UGM) mengadakan lomba esai lite…