2

I. COURT AUTHORITY

That Article 6A paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution states that there is no spouse

candidate for President and Vice President Elected, two candidate couples who

acquired the first and second most votes in the election commonly chosen

by the people directly and the couple who obtain the popular vote

most are sworn in as President and Vice President;

With the grace of the Almighty God, by driven the sublime wishes

if The chapter (4) is given the abundance of Mercy and

His bounty is then. If word ... The President and Vice President ... two couples ...

and second ... if given his hyper-law decided by the Chief Justice

Constitution according to the number of order numbers set the Election Commission

General of the Jakarta Region became ... The President and Vice President become

... The Governor and Deputy Governor ... the two couples became indifferent ... and second

to be none;

Special Exception for the Government of the Special Region Capital (DKI) Jakarta;

So that Article 6A paragraph (4) Act No. 29 of 2007 can

be bowled to: " In case there are no candidate candidates for Governor and Vice

The elected governor, the candidate who received the first most votes in

the general election was chosen by the people directly and the couple who

received the most votes of people appointed as Governor and Vice-

Governor ";

According to the pair set by the Chairman of the Regional Elections DKI

Jakarta special number first order received the most votes selected by

the people directly got the top priority of leading Jakarta's DKI;

The consideration is for the reasons that the Governor's Regional Head and Vice

The governor of Jakarta can be categorized as parallel to the Leader of the Republic of Indonesia

President, RI II is Vice President and/or Gubenur and Deputy Governor

DKI Jakarta. Appointment and appointment by the President, with

consideration of the Office of the Governor and Deputy Governor/Regional Chief of DKI

Jakarta has a strategic and geographical location with

The Central Government and the Ambassador Great Friend Country.

3

II. LEGAL STANDING (LEGAL STANDING) PEMOHON

1. The applicant is a party that is considered a constitutional right to be harmed

the enactment of Article 11 of the paragraph (1) Act No. 29 of 2007

as an individual of Indonesian citizens;

2. The terms of the constitutional rights loss of the applicant need to be obtained in

The termination of the Constitutional Court by designating 5 (five) damages terms

rights and/or constitutional authority as referred to in Article

51 verses (1) Act No. 24 Year 2003, as follows: (a)

the existence of the rights and/or constitutional authority of the applicant granted

by the Constitution of 1945, (b) the rights and/or constitutional authority,

is considered to have been harmed by the An Act that

is required for testing, (c) the right and/or authority must

be specific (special) and actual or at least a potential that

contains reasonable reasoning that can be certain to occur, (d) Adanya

the causal relationship (causal verband) between the loss is intended. with

the enactment of the Act, the constitutional loss

it will not or may not happen again;

The Jakarta Regional Chief Election Process due to any costs

posed by post Such budget will affect the

load costs equally to the participants. invalid voice vote, vote

not even the entire Jakarta population without exception,

direct and indirect. Against the public needs of the community

The prices are uncontrollased, the costs incurred by

supporters and candidates, and other non-official forms of assistance

overload the people of Jakarta;

The lid The general public community of productive age for achievement and not

works, closing opportunities in position as leader

government of Jakarta as the candidate for Lurah/Village Head, Bupati/Walikota,

Members of the City of Kapupaten/City chosen directly by the people

DKI Jakarta. Thus it is the reason for the applicant to

the materiel is required to obtain a Constitutional Court ruling,

so that the opportunity to suppress organized aberration action

such as corruption could be avoided;

4

3. That the applicant is an individual citizen of Indonesia based on

evidence card of the population and other identity evidence as an

fighter defending the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia that is pro against

interest Public and/or many people remain rejected

corruption occurred;

Has fulfilled the legal qualification under Article 27 paragraph (1)

Constitution of 1945 declaring all citizens together at

in law. and the government and compulsory uphold the law and

his government was with no There's a kiss. So the applicant

has the interest to deliver a material test right (judicial review)

as contemplated;

4. That Article 27 paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution states that all citizens

at the same time both in law and government and compulsory

uphold the law and government it does not exist

unless it is. Then Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution declared independence

union and assembly, issuing thoughts with oral and written

and so on set with Undang-Undang;

5. That the first pair of votes was chosen by the people to meet

terms of being the Governor and Deputy Governor have passed through selection

level of political party DPD DKI Jakarta, Regional Electoral Commission of DKI

Jakarta, and through selection selection done directly by

the people with the most votes in the Jakarta community dated July 11

2012, as per the applicable perinvitation;

6. That the applicant as a warrior cares for the interests of the nation and country

which is pro against the interests of the crowd is crowded. Defend and support

the interest of the most votes was chosen directly by the people of DKI

Jakarta could realize New Jakarta sent it to

Governor and Deputy Governor of DKI Jakarta Elected;

By that cause The non-formal yurisidis and customary law proper and

deserve the seat of the Governor and Deputy Governor of Jakarta

aligned with the leadership of the Republic of Indonesia II (RI II), due to the location

geographic Government of Jakarta That may be the reason

The applicant.

5

7. Provide space for the most votes directly selected by the people

Jakarta, opportunity and gold opportunities to work, deploy

all potential for devotion to nation and country as well as the people

DKI Jakarta;

Election District Head of District/City, Member of DPRD

District/City, and Head of Village/Lurah in DKI Jakarta.

New Jakarta was very good among the good, as a barometer and

deserved as well as being worthy of the other Local Government in Indonesia.

It will open up the public public works of DKI Jakarta, as

the form of the bureaucratic reforms of the bureaucracy also makes a change as

the applicant reason.

III. SUBJECT 1. That the things that have been put forward in the authority of the Court

The Constitution and the applicant ' s law as described above

are inseparable parts of the subject

this request;

2. That the law is present for seekers of justice with the paradigm

that if justice seekers face an issue

the law, then not the seeker of justice is blamed, but the

the law enforcement must do something about the existing law,

including the azas/norm reviewer, doctrine, substance as well as procedure that

applies including in this case the norms set about, the requirements

to be able to be appointed as Governor and Vice Governor Elected

with the most votes selected directly by the people DKI Jakarta;

3. That the law is present in the middle of society as not simply

according to the black-and-white words of the ordinance (according to the letter),

but according to the spirit and the meaning deeper (to the very meaning)

of the Law or the Law. The law is not only run with

intellectual intelligence but with spiritual intelligence. Execute

the law must be with determinations, empathy, dedication, commitment to

the nation ' s suffering to dare seek another path to the truth,

justice and certainty of law for the searchers of justice;

4. That pro fighters against the interests of the kalayak were crowded, which during this time

occurred widely, which not only harmed the country ' s finances but

6

has also been a violation of social and economic rights

society is widely so that the criminal perpetrators of corruption are classed

as a crime, it is made the reason for the applicant to be tested for materiel.

The radiant should be done amazingly, which requires

roles as well as from all layers of the system including the younger generation

the nation to care for the prevention and eradication of the perpetrator

corruption;

5. That the applicant declared the Chairman of the DKI Regional Election Commission

Jakarta, had prepared the Governor and Deputy Governor with

the most votes chosen directly by the people of Jakarta, above

the result of the calculation. vote conducted July 11, 2012

openly, honestly, fair, transparent no cheating and not

using the politics of money for the citizens of Jakarta;

6. That the applicant assessees the spouse who obtained the most votes

directly elected by the people of Jakarta, has finished following

stages, standards and conditions to be adhered to from the Election Chairman

The General Region of the DKI Jakarta is gradually going through a schedule that has been

set;

7. That the applicant states that the applicant has the most votes

directly elected by the people of Jakarta, the devotion in the effort

embody the New Jakarta closely concerned the interests of the people

by issuing the Card Healthy Jakarta, Jakarta Smart Card for residents

DKI Jakarta. With an honest figure, clean, transparent and catered to

the interests of the people of Jakarta as the reason for the applicant to test

materiel. Jakarta was ready to carry out its new duties, very becoming

the attention of the people of Jakarta and outside of Jakarta;

8. That the constitutional right of the applicant guaranteed by the constitution is right

to be recognized as personal before the law, is the human rights

that cannot be reduced under any circumstances, including only

for reasons certain;

9. That according to legal expert Prof. Dr. Jimly Asshiddiqie, S.H., there is

a constitutional protection against human rights with a guarantee

the law for the demands of its affirmation through a fair process. Protection

against such human rights is widely public in

7

order to promote respect and protection against rights

human rights as an important feature of a legal state that

democratic and political;

10. That according to the jurist Prof. Dr. Sri Sumarti, SH, the State of Law

in Article 1 of the paragraph (3) of the Constitution of 1945 shall at least meet the elements

as follows: (1) The administration in performing the duties and

its obligations must be based upon laws or regulations-

invitations, (2) Adanya guarantees on human rights (citizens

states), (3) Adanya the division of power within the country, (4) Adanya

supervision and government bodies of the country;

11. That according to the jurist Prof. Dr. Jimly Asshiddiiqie, S.H., stated

there are 12 (twelve) state principal principles of the law (Rechstaat) that

buffers standing upright in a legal country (The Rule of Law/Rechstaat)

in a true sense: (1) legal (Supermacy of

Law), (2) legal equality (Equality before the Law), (3) asas

legality (Due Process of Law), (4) limitation of power, (5) organs

Independent Executive, (6) free and impartial judiciary, (7) judicial

state efforts, (8) state courts (Constitutional Court), (9)

protection of human rights, (10) is democratic (Democrats

Rechsstaat), (11) the means of realizing the country's purpose (Welfare)

Rechsstaat), (12) tranparation and social control;

12. That is the norm in Article 11 (1) Act No. 29

In 2007 of Article 27 of the paragraph (1) of the Constitution of 1945 which adheres to the principle

The equality of the Law (Equality Before the Law). That all citizens

states have the same rights to serve the nation and country

in the effort of managing, running, planning and supervising

governance. Violating the principle of justice, the equation in law, has

restricts the younger generation of potential to do great work

building a nation and state in all its bidang/sector, period

earning a golden age to work and accomplishment, as the basis

the reason for the applicant to be proofed of matter.

IV. PETITUM 1. Accept and grant the supplicant;

8

2. Article 6A clause (4) of the 1945 Constitution states that: in no case

spouse of the candidate for President and Vice President Elected, two candidate couples

who received the first and second most votes in the election

the general was elected by the people directly and the couple who earn

the most votes of the people are sworn in as President and Vice President,

contrary to Article 11 of the paragraph (1) Act Number 29 of the Year

2007;

3. Article 11 of the paragraph (1) of the Law No. 29 of 2007 states:

The spouse of a candidate for Governor and the Deputy Governor who received a vote more

of 50% (fifty percent) is designated as Governor and Vice

The governor is elected. Sheet of State of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2007 Number

93, Additional Gazette Republic of Indonesia No. 4744, spouse

The most votes were directly elected by the people of DKI Jakarta have

the power of the law is binding with all due to its laws;

4. Article 11 of the paragraph (1) of the Law No. 29 of 2007 states:

The spouse of a candidate for Governor and the Deputy Governor who received a vote more

of 50% (fifty percent) is designated as Governor and Vice

The governor is elected. Sheet of State of the Republic of Indonesia Year 2007 Number

93, Additional Gazette Republic of Indonesia No. 4744,

in particular the pair gained the most votes directly elected

by the people of DKI Jakarta contradictory to Article 6A paragraph (4) UUD Tahun

1945;

5. According to Article 11 of the paragraph (1) Act No. 29 of 2007

states: the spouse of the candidate for Governor and Deputy Governor who

earned more than 50% (fifty percent) votes as

The governor and the Deputy Governor are elected. Sheet of State of the Republic of Indonesia

Year 2007 Number 93, Additional Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia

No. 4744, no legal force is binding with any

due to its law;

6. Ordering the loading of this ruling in the State Sheet as

should be.

Or

If the Constitutional Court of the Constitutional Court opts another, please the verdict

that is fair (ex aequo et bono).

9

[2.2] Draw that to prove its request control,

The applicant submitted evidence of the letter or written, which was given a proof of P-1

up to the P-13 evidence as follows:

1. Proof P-1: Photocopy Letter Mandate 028 /04/MAN-JB/V/2012

dated 16 May 2012 was given Suwarto, S. Sos as

representative of the Ir Campaign Team. Joko Widodo-Ir. Basuki

Tjahaya Purnama, M.M., in the ratification of DPT and

Witnesses in East Pejaten Solubles;

2. Proof P-2: Photocopy Details-Recapitulation of the number of polling stations and voters

based on the Permanent Chooser List (DPT) of the General Election

Governor and Deputy Governor of Jakarta Province;

3. Evidence P-3: Photocopy Letter of the Ir Campaign Team. Joko Widodo-Ir.

Basuki Tjahaya Purnama, M.M.;

4. Proof of p-4: Photocopy of the Submission List of Box Boxes for Witnesses

Jokowi-Basuki at polling stations as many as 17 Witnesses/TPS;

5. Proof P-5: Photocopy of the Witness Hadir List before Opening As Much

17 Saksi/TPS

6. Evidence P-6: Photocopy of the Witness List completed the Most Voice Calculations

17 Witnesses/TPS;

7. Evidence P-7: Photocopy List of Sound Calculation Acquisition Results

as many as 17 Witnesses/TPS;

8. Evidence P-8: Photocopy Letter on behalf of the Speaker addressed to the Chairman

Constitutional Court dated July 16, 2012 on

Materiel Test Application to implement Act Number

29 Year 2007 Article 11 paragraph (1) of Replacement General

Regional Head/Governor and Deputy Governor of DKI Jakarta

Period 2012-2017;

9. Proof P-9: Photocopying Details List Of Descriptions Relating To

The Implementation Of The General Election/Governor And

The Deputy Governor Of Jakarta As A Supporting Tool And

The Evidence Tool For The Implementation Of The Top Material Test. Execution of

Act No. 29 of 2007 Article 11 paragraph (1)

against the Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia

Year 1945 Chapter III Section 6 of the paragraph (2);

10

10. Evidence P-10: Letter on behalf of the Speaker is addressed to the Chairman

Constitutional Court dated 17 July 2012 on

Materiil Test Application For Implementation Of The Act

No. 29 Year 2007 Article 11 paragraph (1) over Election

General Regional Chief/Governor and Deputy Governor of DKI

Jakarta Period 2012-2017;

11. Evidence P-11: Physical evidence does not exist;

12. Evidence P-12: Photocopy Act No. 29 of 2007 on

Government of the Province Special Region Jakarta Capital

As the State Capital of the Republic of Indonesia;

13. Evidence P-13: Photocopy of the Constitution of the Republic of the Republic of the Republic

Indonesia in 1945.

[2.3] weighed that to shorten the description in this ruling,

everything that happened at the trial was quite appointed in the news of the event

the trial which is one unbreakable unity with

This verdict;

3. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

[3.1] Draw that the intent and purpose of the applicant is

to test the constitutionality of Article 11 of the paragraph (1) Act Number 29

of 2007 on the Government of the Province of Special Region Capital Jakarta

as the State Capital of the Republic of Indonesia (Republican Gazette

Indonesia Year 2007 Number 93, Additional Gazette Republik

Indonesia Number 4744, subsequently called Act 29/2007) against Article 6A paragraph

(4) The Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945 (next

called UUD 1945);

[3.2] weighed that before considering the subject matter,

The Constitutional Court (later called the Court) would consider

in advance of the following:

a. The Court's authority to prosecute the a quo;

11

b. legal standing (legal standing) the applicant to apply

a quo.

Court authority

[3.3] weighing that under Article 24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, Section

10 verses (1) letter a Law Number 24 of 2003 on the Court

The Constitution as amended by Law No. 8 Year 2011

on Changes to the Law No. 24 Year 2003 concerning

Constitutional Court (State Gazette of Indonesia 2011 Number

70, Additional Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number 5226, next

called Act MK) and Article 29 paragraph (1) letter a Act Number 48 Year

2009 on the Power of Justice (State Sheet of the Republic of Indonesia

in 2009 Number 157, Additional Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia Number

5076, subsequently called Act 48/2009), one of the constitutional authorities

The court is prosecuting at the first and last level of its verdict

is final to test the Act against the Constitution of 1945;

[3.4] Draw that the request is to test

constitutionality of Article 11 paragraph (1) Act 29/2007, so therefore

Court Authorized to prosecute a quo;

Legal Occupation (Legal Standing) The applicant

[3.5] weighed that under Article 51 of the paragraph (1) MK Act as well

The explanation, which may apply for a request. testing of the Act

against the Constitution of 1945 is those who consider the rights and/or authority

its constitutionality given by the 1945 Constitution is harmed by the enactment of a

Act, i.e.:

a. Individual citizens of Indonesia (including groups of people

have common interests);

b. the unity of the indigenous law society as long as it is alive and in accordance with

the development of the society and the principle of the Republic of the Republic of Indonesia

which is set in Undang-Undang;

c. the public or private legal entity; or

d. state institutions;

12

Thus, the applicant in testing the Act against

The 1945 Constitution must explain and prove first:

a. The position of the applicant is referred to in Article 51 of the paragraph

(1) of the MK Act;

b. the constitutional rights and/or constitutional authority granted by the Constitution

1945 resulting from the enactment of the required Act

testing;

[3.6] It is also that the Court has since the Decree No. 006 /PUU-

III/2005 dated May 31, 2005 and Decree Number 11 /PUU-V/2007 dated

September 20, 2007, and subsequent rulings have established that

the loss of rights and/or constitutional authority in question of Article

51 paragraph (1) The MK bill must meet five terms, that is:

a. the rights and/or constitutional authority of the applicant given by

Constitution of 1945;

b. the rights and/or the constitutional authority by the applicant is considered

aggrieved by the enactment of the testing Act;

c. the rights and/or constitutional authority should be

specific and actual or at least a potential that according to reasoning

which is reasonable is certain to occur;

d. Due (causal verband) between the rights loss and/or

the constitutional authority is referred to by the Act

which is being moveed to test;

e. It is possible that with the request of a request, then

the rights and/or constitutional rights losses such as those under control

will or no longer occur;

[3.7] Draw that The applicant is a citizen Indonesia which

is housed in Jakarta Province, which is also the Campaign Team

one of the Couples Candidates of the General Election Region of DKI Province

Jakarta. The applicant also postulate that he cared for the votes

the most public DKI Jakarta in selecting the Governor and Deputy Governor

The province of DKI Jakarta, which by Law 29/2007 was given a vote of more votes

of 50% (fifty percent). The provisions of the vote's acquisition limit

resulted in a need for the general election of the regional head.

13

the second, which according to the applicant is weighing the budget, will then

be charged to the entire DKI Jakarta citizen. As such,

The court, the applicant has a legal standing (legal standing) for

applying for the norm a quo testing application;

[3.8] weighed that before considering further

The applicant ' s request, the Court needs to quote Article 54 of the MK Act that

states, " Constitutional Court may request the captions and/or treatises

The meeting with respect to the application is being examined to the Assembly

The Consultative Assembly, the People's Representative Council, the Regional Representative Council,

and/or the President" in conducting testing of an Act.

In other words, the Court may request or not request the captions

and/or the meeting treatises with respect to the ongoing plea

checked out to the People's Consultative Assembly, the House of Representatives,

Council The Regional Representative, and/or the President, depends on the urgency and

its relevance. Due to legal issues and a quo sufficiently

clearly, the Court sees no urgency and relevance for requesting

the captions and/or meeting treatises of the People's Consultative Assembly, Council

Representative People, the Regional House of Representatives, and/or the President, so

The Court immediately cut off the a quo;

[3.9] weighed that in the number I repair of the application, that is

The Court's authority, the applicant cited Article 6A verse (4) of the 1945 Constitution which

states, " In case there is no candidate for President and Vice President

elect, the two candidate couples who are the first most votes and

the second in the general election is chosen by the people directly and the pair

The candidate who received the most votes was sworn in as President and Vice

President". According to the Court as it should be because it relates to authority

The court to test the Act against the Constitution of the Constitution of 1945,

as directed by the applicant then that should be quoted

is Article 24C of the paragraph (1) The Constitution of 1945 stated, "Constitutional Court

authorities prosecute on the first and last level whose verdict is

final to test the Act against UUD 1945 ...". Next the applicant

wrote, "With the Grace of the Almighty God, driven to desire

sublime if set Article 6A verse (4) gets the abundance of grace and

14

His gift then if word ... The President and Vice President ... two couples ... and

second ... if given His hyper-Law to be decided by the Chief Justice of the Constitutional Court

Republic of Indonesia matches the number of order numbers set to the Election Commission

General of Jakarta's DKI Region became ... President and Vice President become

Governor and Deputy Governor ... two couples become non-existing ... and second

being no ... Special exception for the Special Region government

Capital (DKI) Jakarta so that Article 6A paragraph (4) Act No. 29

The year 2007 can be sounded and or construed to be in no case

spouse of the candidate for Governor and Vice-Governor, the candidate who earned

first votes in the general election are chosen by the people

directly and the couple who received the most popular votes were sworn in. as

Governor and Deputy Governor". The Court judged the words of the petitioner in

for the difficulty of being understood, nor is there any relation to the issue of authority

the court, whereas the applicant's description under the subtitle "Authorization

The Court". In addition, in the Act 29/2007 there is no Section 6A clause (4)

as it is written by the applicant;

[3.10] A draw that in the description of the applicant's law

as it is in the sitting section of the case, The Court will provide

one considerations after one:

[3.10.1] weighed that on the amount of expenses incurred in

the Election framework of the Head of Regional (Pemilukada) DKI Jakarta, it

does not exist His relationship with the petitioner's law The financing that

is issued for example by the Correctional Institution such as building a building,

the consumption of prisoners and inmates, the payroll of the Institution employees

Correctional, cannot be associated with legal standing The applicant,

causes the cost of being issued for legal affirmation of the persons

that commits a criminal offence is part of an attempt to carry out the principle

the state of the law;

[3.10.2] It is a draw that the candidate couple who most voted

selectors, so are the choice of candidate couples Certain is not a control that

relates to the legal position, but is closely related to

the proof in the subject of the application and the proof is not present

its relationship with testing Act is like a plea a quo,

15

but in the proof of the dispute the Pemilukada dispute. Similarly about feasible

or not like the Governor and Deputy Governor in alignment with the leadership

Republic of Indonesia II (RI II) due to the geographical location of the Jakarta Government

(should be the geographical location of DKI Jakarta), which The applicant's reason, is

a reason that has nothing to do with the legal position of the applicant;

[3.10.3] weighed that the awarding of the golden opportunity for the chosen by

many voters to work, exerts potential for the engagement against

nation and country, will realize new Jakarta, very good among the

well, as a proper and proper barometer followed by the Local Government

other se-Indonesia, the opening of the employment field for the people of the DKI as

the shape of the bureaucratic reform embodiment, is the assessment The applicant over a certain

figure who, according to the Court, is not the reason for the legal position

of the applicant;

[3.11] A draw that the description of the applicant's request

as it is in the Sitting Perkara section will be considered by

The court is as follows:

[3.11.1] Draw that in the number 1 of its application, the applicant

only suggests that which has been put forth in the authorization

The Court and the Applicant's Law is not

separated from the subject matter. According to the Court, the Court has

considering both the Court's authority and regarding the

Occupation of the applicant, then the subject of a number 1 would not be

considered in its own right;

[3.11.2] Considering that the description contained in the number 2 and the figure 3

the subject of the applicant's request is only theoretical. According to the court of the description

it is not clear to be related to the testing the norms are being honed

the materiel testing by the applicant;

[3.11.3] A draw that the description contained in the number 4 pleas

The applicant on Just point out, "That pro fighter against

The interest of the crowd during this time was widespread, which is not just

harming the country's finances but it has also been a violation of

Social and economic rights of the community so that the perpetrators of corruption are classed

16

as a crime, it is the reason for the applicant to be tested for materiel ...", and

so on. In the context of the applicant's application that tests the constitutionality

Article 11 of the paragraph (1) Act 29/2007 of the Candidates for Governor and Deputy Gubenur

which received a vote of more than 50% (fifty percent) is set to be

Governor and the Deputy Governor Elected, according to the Court, it does not exist

its relationship and it has nothing to do with the norm-mogging the testing

by the applicant. In addition, the phrase was asked by the applicant that

pro fighters against the public interest of the crowd were widespread

which not only harmed the finances of the country, but, according to the applicant, also

has been a violation of the social and economic rights of the community.

When according to the Court, instead the pro fighters interest the crowd.

contrary to, among other things, the corrupt coruptor of the state finances and

violated the rights of the people. social and economic rights of the community;

[3.11.4] Balanced That Contained description In 5 applications

The applicant in which the applicant represents the Chairman of the Election Commission

DKI Jakarta has prepared the Governor and the Deputy Governor with

the most votes directly elected, honest, fair, and the most direct vote. transparent without

cheating by using money politics, according to the Court, is

The applicant ' s subjective judgment that has nothing to do with testing

the norm is motionless testing its constitutionality testing by the applicant. In

aside, the phrase "The applicant states" in conjunction with an

request at a judicial institute as in the Constitutional Court, should

the applicant only "suggest" dalil and the court of justice. " "stated

proven or unsubstantiated a dalil" and then when it has been

stated to be proven, the court will "declare" granted or if it has been

declared not to be proven then the court " stated" the applicant's request

is rejected;

[3.11.5] Draw that the description contained in the number 6 pleas

The applicant, the applicant assess the most votes chosen

directly by the people DKI Jakarta, has finished following the stage, standard

and provisions to be adhered to from the Chairman of the Regional Election Commission

DKI Jakarta gradually through a set schedule, according to

17

The court, is one sentence that is not completed and is not known to mean and

its purpose;

[3.11.6] Draws that the description contained in the number of 7 wishes

The applicant is the assessment of the applicant over the potential spouse of the Governor and the Vice

Governor DKI Jakarta voted the most, as a figure who

honestly, clean, transparent served the people's interests as the reason for the applicant

for the materiel testing norm a According to the Court, the applicant ' s reason

that relates to the concrete case, whereas against testing an

the abstract norm should not be based on concrete case reasons;

[3.11.7] weighed that the description contained in the number 8 plea

The right to be recognized as personal before

the law, as a human right that cannot be reduced in circumstances

anything either, or for any particular reason, according to the Court, is unclear and

not being tunnable what to do with the plea the constitutionalities of the norm that

is being honed by the applicant;

[3.11.8] Draw that description in the number 9 application

The applicant is quoting Jimly Asshidiqie's opinion that the protection of the human rights

man with a fair guarantee for the demands of his affirmation through the process

the fair is true Theoretically. However, according to the Court's assessment,

in conjunction with the a quo application, the applicant did not elaborate

the connection between the theory and the materiel testing norm that

is being honed by the applicant;

[3.11.9] Draw that, according to the Court, in the description contained

at the number 10 and the applicant's 11 requests about the state meaning

laws theoretically according to Sri Sumantri Martosoewignyo and Jimly

Asshiddiqie, however The applicant does not explain the laws of the law to be mobled

constitutional testing conflicting with the elements or parts of the country

the law, so that the applicant's request becomes unclear;

[3.11.10] A draw that the description is on the 12 principal figure

The request suggests that the norm is Article 11 paragraph (1) Act 29/2007

against Article 27 of the paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution which adheres to the law,

that all citizens have the same rights to serve

18

nations and countries in the effort of managing, running, planning, and

supervising the government. Violating the principle of justice, the equation in law,

has limited the generation of young people who could potentially do great work

building a nation and state in all its fields, productive times

golden to work A feat. Dalil Pemapplicant a quo, according to the Court

there is no interchange with the norm Article 11 paragraph (1) Act 29/2007 of which

is being directed at the testing of its constitutionality by the applicant;

[3.12] A draw that in the petitum of the applicant numbers 1, the applicant

implores the applicant to grant the applicant is the usual

put forth by each applicant;

[3.12.1] Draw that in petitum the number 2 pleas, the applicant

implores Section 6A paragraph (4) of the 1945 Constitution which stated, " In no way

there are spouses of candidates for President and Vice President elected, two prospective couples

who earned the first and second most votes in the general election

is chosen by the people directly and

The most appointed as President and Vice President" in conflict with

its laws". According to the Court, the petitum is based on Article 51 of the paragraph (5)

item c of the MK Act should "not have a binding legal force" so

the petitum does not meet the requirement of the MK bill

it is. In addition, the applicant also added a sentence in the petitum

19

"The most votes were directly elected by the DKI Jakarta people"

after the phrase "has a binding legal force with any effect

its laws". The additional sentence in the petitum makes the petitum

the applicant's request is not understood to mean, as it is not

contained in Article 11 of the paragraph (1) Act 29/2007. Furthermore, the petitum was not

intended as part of the conditional constitutional petitum. The applicant is also

wrong in writing " Page of State of the Republic of Indonesia year 2007 No.

93, Additional Gazette Republic of Indonesia No. 4744" due