By: Lisa Rahmawati) *
After the election there was an accusation of fraud, the accusation then made the Indonesian people feel de Javu over the various accusations, especially one Paslon until he had time to declare victory just because he saw the survey results, undoubtedly the political atmosphere was getting hot even though the election was over.
Prabowo’s National Winning Body – Sandiaga was recorded as having issued a 2019 election fraud accusation after the quck count publication of a number of institutions that placed the votes for candidate pair number 02 was under his opponent, Jokowi – Ma’ruf Amin.
To ward off allegations and assumptions about fraud in the 2019 Election, Former Chief Justice Mahfud MD, had visited the General Election Commission (KPU) office.
He claimed that his presence at the KPU was to ensure that there was no fraud committed by the KPU, as was the narrative that had appeared in the public at that time even now.
Mahfud also said, despite several errors in the Data Entry Scan form C1 to the Situng KPU system, it did not mean the KPU was cheating. Moreover, the error in data entry turned out to be nothing compared to the total number of polling stations.
The KPU has guaranteed the transparency of vote counting and recapitulation, because every officer and witness at the polling station holds form C1 or the results of the vote count.
“So do not act on their own and do not continue to develop hoaxes as if – there will be engineering here,” said Mahfud MD.
In this case the National Police also keeps an eye on the possibility of a criminal act in the 2019 election process. National Police Chief General Tito Karnavian said that his party would enforce the law against certain parties who tried to provoke the public.
Tito explained, if there were parties who accused the existence of fraud in the election without clear evidence, it could be subject to criminal sanctions with Law number 46 article 14 and 15 or spread false news that caused confusion.
“For example, say cheating but the evidence is unclear, then there is confusion, the community is provoked. So the article can be used, “said Tito.
His party also said that the possibility of criminal acts was the same as the case of Ratna Sarumpaet who once claimed to be beaten. Ratna is called to spread false news and cause trouble.
Although the allegations of fraudulent elections are difficult to suppress, the KPU is ready to break the argument that the implementation of fraudulent elections is structured and systematic.
The KPU in the case of the PHPU in the Constitutional Court was located as the defendant. So the KPU must be prepared to face the petition of the petition that has been submitted to the Constitutional Court. This is also to account for what the KPU has done so far.
In compiling the answer, KPU Commissioner Pramono has prepared two things. First, the KPU will study the main points of the applicant’s request, so that they can ascertain where the focus of the problem is and what substance is being requested.
The next step, KPU will coordinate all Provincial KPU and Regency / City KPU in compiling answers to the main points of the request. The KPU wants to ensure that the provincial KPU and the Regency / City KPU outline the answers clearly, both in terms of quantitative and chronological descriptions.
“In this way, we will maximize the trial forum in the Constitutional Court to refute the arguments put forward by the applicant, and break the allegations that the KPU has committed various frauds during the process of the election stage,” said Pramono.
In addition to proving fraudulent elections, the applicant or plaintiff must attach authentic evidence in his claim report, not with a copy of the news from online media.
KPU commissioner Viryan Aziz said that the dispute over the election result dispute (PHPU) at the Constitutional Court (MK) was not only an opportunity for election participants to get election justice.
“For us organizers, who were delivered or accused of not being fair, it is also important to get election justice in the Constitutional Court. “The work of the organizers of the election is not manipulative and is not fraudulent,” he said.
Viryan also stressed that the KPU would prove at the Court’s hearing that it had worked according to the rules and was not manipulative. Thus, the Court’s hearing was an opportunity for the KPU to clarify various negative allegations against the KPU.
In this case, of course the election participants who want to seek justice in the Constitutional Court must attach authentic and accountable evidence, not just assumptions and statements that are confusing the atmosphere.
) * The author is a sociopolitical observer
