By: Slamet Santoso) *
Before the Election lawsuit begins, the contents of the Prabowo – Sandiaga Uno petitum have been questioned and doubted by several parties, whether the contents of the petitum can melt the hearts of the Constitutional Court Judges or not. Where one of the contents of the lawsuit is winning the pair 02 and disqualifying pair 01 of Jokowi – Ma’ruf Amin.
Even though the Prabowo – Sandiaga Legal team did not show sufficient evidence and inconsistency regarding his victory claims.
At present, the legal expert Bivitri Susanti is doubting the petitum submitted by the Prabowo-Sandiaga camp, he doubted because he did not believe whether the petitum was actually prepared by the legal team or by the pair Prabowo-Sandiaga as the applicant’s principal.
“The question arises in my mind, are these breakthrough ideas from the legal power team or the principal’s request? Because it seems as if it is not made by a legal person, “said Bivitri.
It doubts the two points, the first is the doubt of the request of partner 02 to the Constitutional Court to disqualify Jokowi and Ma’ruf Amin. Second, Asking the Constitutional Court Judge to dismiss the Commissioner of the General Election Commission (KPU).
Bivitri explicitly states that disqualification requests are not commonly included in general election results (PHPU)
Not unlike Bivitri, the same narrative was also conveyed by the Director of the Center for Constitutional Studies (PUSaKO), Faculty of Law, Andalas University. For Feri, the two points mentioned above are not logical if it is stated in the general election result request (PHPU).
Petitum is related to the dismissal of all KPU commissioners and replacing them with new ones is something that is not logical. “My question is, if the PSU is held tomorrow morning, but (the commissioner) KPU will be deactivated, then who will carry out the election? This is really not accepted with logic, the law must use logic, “Feri said.
Regarding the re-voting request (Feri), Feri said that the issue was not logical because it did not have a clear reason. There is no evidence of the extent to which fraud is massive so the PSU must be held.
“When viewed from the Bawaslu indicator, fraud is said to be massive if it occurs in half the area or in 50 percent of the electoral district, the problem was not seen in yesterday’s application,” he said.
According to Feri, the lawsuit from the 02 Prabowo camp – Sandiaga was problematic because of inconsistency. In one section, there was a vote inflation of up to 22 million, while in the other part there were 16 million.
He also said that it would be dangerous if the Court immediately granted the petitum the next day.
While on the other hand, the Prabowo – Sandiaga Legal team also requested a repeat vote.
“The re-voting is very common in the petitum. But what is unusual, he asked for a replacement for KPU members first, “said Bivitri.
Chairperson of the KPU Arief Budiman also spoke up and called the petitum related to allegations of violations of the ethics of election administrators.
He said that the lawsuit should not be filed at this time because the Constitutional Court only took care of disputes that occurred after the election results. He reminded that every dispute in the administration of elections has its own place for settlement.
“If there are violations of the election administration it is reported to Bawaslu. If there is a criminal, it will be handled by Gakkumdu. If there is a violation of ethics, the performance of the commissioner, please take it to DKPP. If there is a dispute the results are brought to the Constitutional Court. This is the wrong address or not, please please the Court that evaluates, “Arief said.
In addition, in the trial request, the BPN also cited the opinions of experts who were not confirmed earlier. As a result, making the proposed application is irrelevant.
If we look at the petitum submitted, it appears that Prabowo – Sandiaga’s Legal Counsel Team has built up the assumption that Kubu 01 and KPU have been cheated in the 2019 presidential election.
Even though they should strengthen the evidence and witnesses in the trial, the problem is that the evidence they have may be invalid or valid, how can the Constitutional Court grant the request for faction 02 if the evidence provided is very weak, or not the person who composed the petitum don’t understand the law?
) * The author is a sociopolitical observer