Key Benefits:
5
10. The applicant's opinion in evidence of P-4 on page 2, page 3, and page
4 states that the charge material of Article 46 of the paragraph (2) Invite
Invite Number 12 Year 2003, is a biases and multi commentaries.
11. With the charge material of Section 24 (4) and the charge material of Article 27 paragraph
(4) the Act No. 8 of 2012 which still remains in reference
to the charge material of Article 46 of the paragraph (2) Act Number 12 of the Year
2003, the applicant is very feel the rights and/or authority
its constitutionality is violated and disadvantaged as warranted by the Article
28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Second Amendment.
12. That next in the Constitutional Court Decree No. 006 /PUU-
III/2005 and Putermination Number 010 /PUU-III/2005 have determined 5 (five)
the terms of the constitutional disadvantage as referred to in Article 51 of the paragraph
(1) MK Act, as following:
a. existence of the right and/or constitutional authority provided by
Constitution of 1945;
b. The rights and/or constitutional authority are considered to have been
aggrieved by the enactment of the testing Act;
c. rights loss and/or constitutional authority are swatting
specific (specifically) and actual or at least any potential
according to reasonable reasoning can be certain to occur;
d. a causal link between the rights loss
and/or constitutional authority with the Act
is required testing;
e. there is a possibility that with the application being granted then
rights loss and/or the constitutional authority that is postulate is not
again occurs.
13. On the execution of the formation of the constituency (dapil) as
referred to by the charge section 46 paragraph (2) Act No. 12
In 2003, the process of the formation could be considered detriable
The applicant is due to process breaking or contemplation of the region
the administration could happen with a possible number of options (proof
P-4 page 3)
14. For example, if the legislative election results are won in absolute terms
by one of the election participants, the results of this election could potentially be not recognized
6
legitimately as it may be that the other Election participants will assume
that the result of the illumination is full of cheating, and this outness
could start with a dapilnya formation approach (for prospective members
DPRD) which is multi commend and closed.
15. If reviewed further, it would generally be a lot of harm
citizens due to their dapill formation approach in addition to
posed a corruption effect [because of the extra cost to be
issued by the ocnum Members of a particular political party to cooperate
with the Member States Election Commission (KPUD)
form the engineering dapil] can also cause mutual suspicion among the
Election participants. If the curial one has come to the point of conflict that is
very pointy, this will lead to political stability, stability
the security and stability of the country's economy becomes disrupted, which in
eventually will be many adverse people because inflation and prices will
increase, consumer purchasing power decreases, severing
Working relations (layoffs), unemployment rate is higher, revenue
national decline, economic growth rate declining and last
there was a national economic recession
16. If the situation is described in points 13 and points 14 above
happens, the applicant is concerned when later to be a member of the KPUD
due to recognition, guarantee, protection and legal certainty as
members of the KPUD could be unclear.
17. That based on those features above, the applicant is a party
which has a causal relationship (causal verband) between the rights loss
and/or the constitutional authority by the enactment of the Act
which be asked to be tested, because of the charge materials Section 24 of the paragraph (4) and
Section 27 paragraph charge matter (4) Act No. 8 of 2012
about the General Election of the People's Representative Council, the House of Representatives
Regions, and the House of Representatives The people of the Regions are contrary to the article
28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Second Amendment.
18. It is clear that if the a quo does not provide any recognition, guarantee,
the protection and legal certainty for any citizen, the impact
is bad about to befall to any citizen. As such,
automatically the applicant has a legal position (legal standing)
7
as a party in the Test Request Act against
UUD 1945
19. That the applicant is concerned if the charge material of Article 24 (4) and
of charge of Article 27 paragraph (4) Act No. 8 of 2012
is not overturned by the Assembly of Justice of the Constitutional Court. Rights and/or
the constitutional authority of the applicant guaranteed by UUD 1945 is
factual and potential aggrieved
C. THE SUBJECT OF THE APPLICATION Below is a copy of the subject-related section
test for the material testing:
1. Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Second Amendment.
"Everyone is entitled to the recognition, guarantee, protection, and
fair legal certainty as well as the same treatment before the law".
2. Article 46 Of The paragraph (2) Invite Number 12 Year 2003.
" Redemption of House member constituency, DPRD Province and DPRD
District/City determined by KPU with provisions of each area
elections get seat allocation between 3 (three) up to 12 (two
thirteen) seats ".
3. Article 24 Of The paragraph (4) Of The Number 8 (2012).
"Further provisions on electoral regions and seat allocation
members of the provincial DPndonesian Legislative Elections, 2004 Buklet & CD-ROM
KPU.Published 2004 by The Electoral Commission in Jakarta, Written in
Indonesia ".
9. Preliminary evidence cited from the statement of Pipit S. Kartawidjaja and Print
Pramono via his book entitled "Akal-Akalan Election Region"
in the preface of the vii page in paragraph 3 of
http://www.watchindonesia.org/Buecher/Akal-Akalan.pdf, reads " Which is interesting, mapping of election areas conducted by the KPU appears to benefit a particular party and harms the other party. For example, one constituency that was formed transverse from south to north, after the votes were counted, the acquisition of the seats was the A 3-seat Party, the B and C respectively two seats, and the D 1 seat. But if that election area was formed from east to west, the acquisition of the seats could turn into a 2-seat, B 3-seat RD as referred to in paragraph (1), paragraph (2), and
paragraph (3) is set in KPU rules".
4. Article 27 Of The paragraph (4) Invite Number 8 Year 2012.
"Further provisions about constituency and seat allocation
members of the district/city DPRD as referred to in paragraph (1), paragraph
(2), and paragraph (3) are set in KPU rules".
5. Article 4 paragraph (2) of the Constitution of the Constitutional Court Number 06 /PMK/2005
on the Event Guidelines in the Test Perkara Invite Invite.
" The material testing is the test of the Act in respect of the material
the charge in the paragraph, section, and/or section of Law considered
contrary to the 1945 Constitution ".
6. Section 14 of the paragraph (1), paragraph (2) and paragraph (3) of the Rules of the Constitutional Court
No. 06 /PMK/2005 on the Event Guidelines in Test Perkara
Invite Invite.
8
(1) The associated parties referred to Section 13 paragraph (1) hurup g are parties
directly or indirectly with the subject
the request.
(2) Related parties of direct interest are the parties
and/or its authority is affected by the subject of the application.
(3) The related party as referred to as paragraph (2) may be entitled
The same one with the applicant in the trial in terms of the caption
and the evidence tool he has been adjudicator of has not been sufficiently represented in
The captions and evidence tools submitted by the President/Government,
DPR, and/or DPD.
Here is the reason and the subject of material testing:
1. That according to Section 14 of the paragraph (1), paragraph (2), and paragraph (3) of the Regulation
Constitutional Court Number 06/PMK/2005, the Election Commission
(KPU) can be categorised as an interest-related party
directly due to rights and/or The authority to create the rules
as referred to in Section 24 of paragraph (4) and Section 27 paragraph (4)
Act No. 8 Year 2012 is affected by the subject
the applicant request.
2. That the Provincial Election Commission of the Province is the executor
form the candidate of the provincial DPRD Member States in the administrative region
Province.
3. That the Municipal Election Commission/City is the executor
form the candidate of the Member of the District Council/City in the region
the administration of the regency/City.
4. Until recently the material charge of Article 46 paragraph (2) Act Number
12 Years 2003 has not been repealed. As such, the materials
Section 24 of the paragraph (4) and the mutant material Section 27 paragraph (4) Invite
Invite Number 8 of 2012 automatically still refers
to the charge materials Section 46 of the paragraph (2) Act Number 12 of the Year
2003.
5. In material testing papers (P-4 evidence) entitled "Methods or
Principles of the Establishment of Elections Under the Act
Number 12 Year 2003 and Act No. 8 of 2012".
The applicant has made and developed an approach
9
mathematics for the formation of a dapil. Intent and purpose
This approach is to direct KPU and KPUD members
to be obedient to the election principle (effective and efficient) especially in
the attitude of honesty as well as justice in terms of making regulatory regulations
and form dapil candidate members of the Provincial and District Council/City.
6. Papers made in P-4 evidence (specifically in section B), if
further be beneficial for society, participants and
Election supervisors, due to the public, participants and supervisors of the Election could
directly could Supervising the formation of the leaves is open
and transparent so that in the event of results of the test results
indications of an aberration, the results of this outcome
will be easier in correction. In addition, the contents of this applicant's paper
will be closely related to a mandatory state obligation
run, in case of the prevention of alleged bribery crimes in
the process of forming the candidate of the DPRD candidate Province and Kabupaten/
City. Furthermore, if the content of the applicant's paper is not used,
The applicant is concerned that the state's obligation as
means that it will not be accommodated into Article 24 and Article 27
Act Number 8 of the Year 2012.
7. In principle, the applicant agrees with the KPU that the formation of
a dapil for prospective members of the DPRD in the province region and
District/City should be formed using a methodology.
8. However, in Article 24 of the paragraph (4) and Article 27 of the paragraph (4)
Act No. 8 of 2012, the Act a quo
has set a double standard in providing policy options
(legal policy). On the one hand, the KPU in making provisions regarding
dapil and seat allocation can be interpreted that the formation of the dapil and
determination of the seat allocation could be made using an
rule. On the other hand, the KPU is in making provisions regarding the dapil
and the seat allocation can be interpreted that the formation of the dapil and
determination of the seat allocation must be made using a
methodology and the settings are submitted To the KPU.
10
9. The applicant assumes that Article 24 of the paragraph (4) and section 27 paragraph (4)
Act No. 8 of the Year 2012 could reflect injustice
(injustice) and legal uncertainty (legal uncertainty).
10. The applicant wants to state that based on the description above,
the charge materials Section 24 of the paragraph (4) and the charge matter Article 27 paragraph (4)
Act Number 8 of the Year 2012 concerning the Member General Election
The House of Representatives, Regional Representative Council, and Council
The Regional People's Representative is contrary to Article 28D clause (1) UUD
1945 Second Amendment.
11. Thus, Section 24 of the paragraph (4) and the materials
charge Article 27 paragraph (4) of the Law No. 8 of the Year 2012 concerning
General Elections of the People's Representative Council, Representative Council
Regions, and the House of Representatives The people of the Regions must be declared "no
have a binding legal force".
12. For that to be Article 24 of the paragraph (4) and Article 27 paragraph (4) of the Act
Number 8 of 2012 on the General Election of Councillors
People's Representative, Regional Representative Council, and the House of Representatives
The Regional People are not at odds with the 1945 Constitution A Second Amendment,
The applicant pleads to the Constitutional Court of Justice for the
draft of the sentence of Article 24 of the paragraph (4) and Article 27 of the paragraph (4) Invite Invite
The number 8 of the Year 2012 is augmented with new sentences.
13. Draft sentence of Article 24 paragraph (4) of the Act No. 8 of 2012 which
was read: " Further provisions regarding the constituency and
allocation of member seats of the provincial DPRD as referred to in paragraph
(1), paragraph (2), and verse (3) is set in KPU rules ". Now after
there is this request, a draft sentence of Article 24 paragraph (4) of the Act
No. 8 Year 2012 to: ook which
titled "Akal Akalan Region Election" in the word
introduction of the vii page in paragraph 3 of
http://www.watchindonesia.org/Buecher/Akal-Akalan.pdf
7. A copy of the section related to the subject
test for the material testing
8. The Court of Justice of the Constitutional Court Number
06 /PMK/2005. Article 3 of the letter a, Article 4 of the paragraph (2). Article 5
paragraph (1) and paragraph (2). Section 6 of the paragraph (3) of letters a, letter b
and the letter c. Article 13 of the paragraph (1) hurup g, Article 14, Article
19, and Article 20.
9. Photocopy of the Population Card on Hadi's name
Setiadi.
4 Evidence P-4 Photocopy Makalah Method Or Princip Formation
Election area under Law Number 12
Year 2003 on Election Member of the Board
People's Representative, Regional Representative Council, and Council
Regional People's Representative and Number 8 Act
In 2012 about the Board of Councillors
People's Representative, Regional Representative Council, and the Council
The Regional People's Representative
15
[2.3] weighed that to shorten the description in this ruling,
everything that happened in the trial was quite appointed in the news of the event
the trial, which is one unitary one
this verdict;
3. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS
[3.1] Draw that the subject of the applicant is testing
constitutionality of Article 24 of the paragraph (4) and Article 27 paragraph (4) Act Number
8 Year 2012 concerning the General Election of the Board Member People's Representative,
Regional Representative Council, and the Regional People's Representative Council (State Sheet 2012 2012 Number 117, Additional Gazette
Republic of Indonesia Number 5316, subsequently called UU 8/2012) against
The Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945 (next called UUD 1945);
[3.2] A draw that before considering the legal position
(legal standing) the applicant and the subject matter, the Constitutional Court
(subsequently called the Court) would first consider the The Court's authority to prosecute a quo;
Constitutional authority
[3.3] weighing that under the provisions of Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution
and Article 10 of the paragraph (1) letter of the Law Number 24 Year 2003 on the Constitutional Court as it has been amended by Act Number
8 Years 2011 on Changes to the Law No. 24 Year 2003
on the Constitutional Court (Sheet State Republic Of Indonesia Year 2011 Number 70, Additional Leaf of the Republic of Indonesia No. 5226, next abbreviated Act MK) juncto Section 29 paragraph (1) letter a Act
Number 48 Year 2009 on the Power of Justice (Indonesian Republic of Indonesia 2009 Number 157, Additional State Sheet
Republic of Indonesia Number 5076), Court authorized to prosecute at level
first and last of which the verdict is final to test the Invite-Invite against the 1945 Constitution;
[3.4] In the draw that the applicant is testing
the constitutionality of the Act in casu of Article 24 of the paragraph (4) and Article 27 of the paragraph (4)
16
Act 8/2012 against UUD 1945 which became one of the Court's authority, so the Court of Justice for prosecuting a quo;
[3.5] weighed that before considering further pleas
The applicant, the Court needs to cite Article 54 of the MK Act stating, " The Constitutional Court may request the captions and/or meeting treatises
with regard to the application being examined to the Assembly
The Consultative Assembly, House, Regional Representative Council, and/or the President"
in conducting testing of an Act. In other words,
The court may request or not to request the captions and/or meeting treatises with respect to the application being examined to the Assembly
The Consultative Assembly, the House of Representatives, the House of Representatives. The area,
and/or the President, depends on the urgency and relevance. Due to legal issues and the "a quo plea" clearly, the Court viewed
there was no urgency and relevance for asking for the information and/or treatise
meeting of the People's Consultative Assembly, the People's Representative Council, The Regional Representative Council, and/or the President, so the Court directly broke the a quo;
[3.6] weighed that before considering the legal position
(legal standing) the petitioner to apply for a request. a quo and a staple
plea, the Court first will considering about
the applicant's request, as follows:
[3.7] A draw that in its request, the applicant is postulate:
1. Regarding the constituency (dapil) the applicant has compiled a paper titled "The Method Or Principles of the Establishment of Elections Based On the Invite-
Invite Number 12 Year 2003 and Act Number 8 of 2012".
In the paper the applicant has made and developed a mathematical approach to the formation of a dapil. Intent and
the aim of the approach is to direct members of the KPU and KPUD
to be obedient to the election principle (effective and efficient) especially in the attitude of honesty and justice in making the rules and shaping
dapil candidate members of the Provincial and District Council/City.
2. The applicant's paper will be beneficial to the public, participants and supervisors of the Election, as the public, participants and supervisors of the Election can
directly oversee the formation of its dapills openly and
17
is transparent so that in the event the results of the test results are found
indications of an aberration, the results of this dapilnya will be more easily corrected. In addition, the contents of the paper will be closely related
with a mandatory state obligation, in terms of prevention
alleged criminal bribery in the process of forming a candidate for the Provincial Assembly and the Province of Representatives. District/City. If the contents of the applicant 's paper
this is not used, the applicant is concerned that the country' s obligations
as it means it will not be accommodated into Section 24 of the paragraph (4) and Article 27 paragraph (4) Act Number 8 of the Year 2012.
3. According to the applicant, the forming of the Act has set a double standard in providing policy options (legal policy) in the provisions
Article 24 of the paragraph (4) and Section 27 paragraph (4) Act Number 8 of the Year 2012,
that is in one The sides, the KPU in making provisions regarding the dapil and allocation
seats can be interpreted that the formation of the dapil and the determination of seat allocations could be made using a regulation. On the other hand, the KPU in
makes provisions regarding the dapil and the allocation of seats can be interpreted that
the formation of the dapil and the determination of the seat allocation must be made using a methodology and the settings are handed over to the The PU.
4. Based on the above reason, the provisions of Section 24 of the paragraph (4) of the Law No. 8 of 2012 which originally stated " Further provisions regarding the constituency and the allocation of seats of the provincial DPRD
as intended on verse (1), paragraph (2), and paragraph (3) is set in
regulatory KPU ", be" Further terms