Advanced Search

Test The Material Constitutional Court Number 27/puu-Viii/2010 2010

Original Language Title: Uji Materi Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 27/PUU-VIII/2010 Tahun 2010

Subscribe to a Global-Regulation Premium Membership Today!

Key Benefits:

Subscribe Now for only USD$40 per month.
e in the Bakal List of Representatives of the Regency of Timor

South Central by Pengurus/Council of the Branch of the Enforcement Party

Democracy Indonesia (DPC-PPDI) of Central Timorese Regency South

with Candidate Number 1 of South Central Timor Election Region I

South Central Timorese Regency (Evidence-P-4);

Thus the applicant is a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia and

A Member of the Political Party of PPDI (Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party) who

has been set to be submitted as a would be a member of the Assembly Member

South Central Timor regency in the implementation of the 2009 Elections,

so by itself the applicant has qualified for

set to be the Nomination Candidate of the Timorese Regency Council

South Central period 2009-2014;

9. The provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) of the Law No. 10 of 2008

about the General Elections of the Representatives, DPD and the DPRD, stated:

" The candidate for the Speaker of the House, the Provincial Council and the District Council/City

as referred to in the paragraph (1) replaced with candidate from the Candidates List

5

Fixed The Political Party of Election participants in the same Election Region

based on the Political Party Decision in question;

Next Explanation of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act Number 10 of the Year

2008 stated:

"Article 218 of the verse (3) is quite clear";

10. The provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act Number 10 of the Year

2008 on the Elections of the Members of the House, DPD and DPRD, are linked

with the constitutional rights of the applicant as a Member of the Party Member States

Politics of the PPDI (Indonesian Democratic Party of Democracy) in the Timorese Election Region

Central South I County South East Timor, which is de facto

The applicant has been eligible to be set and submitted as the candidate

The Member of the Union DPRD South Central Timor Regency (Evidence P-30, Evidence

P-31, Proof P-32, Evidence P-33, and Proof P-34);

11. The constitutional right of the applicant is submitted and designated as a replacement candidate

Member of the Central Timorese Council of South East Timor is guaranteed with the provision

Article 22E paragraph (3) of the 1945 Constitution, which states:

paragraph (3): " General Election Participant to elect a member of the Board

The People's Representative and Member of the Regional People's Representative Council is

The Political Party ".

The provisions of Article 22E of the paragraph (3) of the Constitution of 1945 are above being linked to

provisions of Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, determined:

paragraph (1), " Everyone is entitled to the recognition of bail, protection and

fair legal certainty as well as equal treatment before the law;

With this, the applicant as a citizen of the Republic of Indonesia Member

The Political Party of PPDI (Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party) has the right

constitutionally obtaining recognition, assurance, protection and certainty

fair laws as well as equal treatment before the law: in

the applicant ' s perspective as a Member of the South East Timorese County PPDI

which has been qualified to be submitted and designated as the Nomination Candidate

DPRD of South Central Timor Regency period 2009-2014, but until

with this request, the applicant has not been set as a candidate

The Central Timorese District Court's replacement even though the applicant

has been established and submitted as the Bakal Candidate Members of the DPRD Member

6

South Central Timorese Regency South Central Timor Elections 2009

by the Political Party of Elections PPDI (the Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party)

as the Political Party of the Election participants in 2009 with a Sequence Number 19 (Evidence

P-7, Evidence P-8 and Evidence P-9);

12. The provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) of the Law No. 10 of 2008 on

Election of the House, DPD and DPRD in the Frasa "Permanent List Remain" in violation

The Constitutional Right of the applicant to be designated as Colon Successor

Member of the DPRD South Central Timor Regency period 2009-2014, by

because of the Election Organizing Institute 2009 (KPU, Provincial KPU and KPU

South Central Timor Regency in the process of establishing the Elected candidate

Member of the Central Timorese County Council The South that is supposed to be set

and the appointment of Central Timorese County Council Member South Central Timor

40 (forty) Member of Central Timorese Central Timorese results

General Election of South Central Timorese DRD, turns 1

(one) members of the Central Timorese Council of Central South Korea Election results 2009

which is derived from membership of PPDI (Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party)

is not set to be sworn in, when it should be under Article 22E

paragraph (3) UUD 1945 then Political Party PPDI (Democratic Enforcement Party

Indonesia) South Central Timor Regency recognized Authorized as Participant

General Election to elect Members of the Regional People's Representative Council

Central Timorese regency South;

13. As it has been described earlier that the applicant as a citizen

a member state of the Political Party of PPDI has been qualified and has been

submitted by the DPC-PPDI Political Parties (Branch Governing Council

Party) Indonesian Democratic Republic of Indonesia) South East Timor Regency, in order to

institute of Elections organizers 2009 (KPU, Provincial KPU and District KPU

South Central Timor establishes the applicant as a Member of the Member of the Member

DPRD County South Central Timor, but KPU, Provincial KPU and

KPU Regency of Central Timor South as the organizer institution

Election 2009 by applying and/or enforcing the provisions of Article

218 paragraph (3) Act No. 10 of 2008 on Election of the DPR, DPD

and DPRD, in particular in the Frasa " Candidate List Fixed " is to be

adverse to the constitutional right of the applicant;

7

Then therefore the applicant has a legal position ( legal standing)

to act as the applicant in the request of the Test Invite-

Invite referred to Section 218 paragraph (3) Act Number 10 2008

about the General Election of Representatives, DPD and DPRD;

Ikal

The prospective member of the Central Timorese City Council is based on

the provisions of Article 52 of the paragraph (1) and the paragraph (4) Act Number 10 Year

2008 on Election Members of the House, DPD and DPRD, which states:

paragraph (1), "Bakal Candidates as referred to Article 51 are compiled in the List

Bakal Candidate by the respective political parties".

Verse (4), " The list of candidates for members of the DPRD district/city is set by

the governing political party of the district/city-level election participants ".

Ahead of the preparation of the Speaker of the House, DPD

and the DPRD of 2009, the applicant is submitted as the Bakal Candidate DPRD

South Central Timorese Regency, which is compiled in the Bakal List

The candidate by the Enforcement Party Indonesian democracy, which for next

is set to bII. REQUEST REASONS

A. UUD 1945 GUARANTEES THE RIGHT TO THE RECOGNITION, GUARANTEES, PROTECTION AND CERTAINTY OF FAIR LAWS AS WELL AS THE SAME TREATMENT BEFORE THE LAW

14. The provisions of Article 22E paragraph (3) of the Constitution of 1945, determine:

The General Election Participant to elect a Member of the People's Representative Council and

Members of the Regional People's Representative Council are Political Parties;

Next article provisions 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution, dete Year 2009 on

Election U m u m Member of the DPR, DPD and DPRD, in relation to

Process of Establishing A Replacement Candidate DPRD South East Timor Regency,

in particular the Candidate for Replacement submitted by DPC-PPDI Timor regency

Central South is to give birth to legal uncertainty for the right of the applicant to

set as Member of the DPRD South East Timor Regency period

2009-2014; whereas the requiver of the applicant have been eligible to be set

as a Member of the Timorese Council of Representatives Middle South

period 2009-2014;

24. Secare de facto and de jure, in fact until the request

This request, then the number of seats of the Timorese Regency Member seats

South Central, which is supposed to be the Central Timorese Regency KPU

South is 40 (forty) people/members of the District Council

South Ceagraph (1) letter a, letter b, letter c

11

or the letter d has been established with the decision of the KPU, provincial KPU or KPU

county/city, the decision of pertination is Cancel By Law;

20. Against the legal status of the Member of State Council of Timor

Central South which is derived from the prospective membership of the proposed candidate

Political Parties PPDI (DPC-PPDI) as the names of the candidates

(DCT) Elections 2009; either

individually or collectively were submitted by DPC-PPDI

The South Central Timorese Regency that is under the leadership of the DPP-

PPDI with the Chairman General Drs. Endung Sutrisno, M. BA and Sekjen V. Joes

Prananto, in case legal standards has been declared invalid according to the Putermination

Supreme Court case of 15 October 2008 No. 686 K/PDT.Sus/

2008; (Evidence P-6);

Next is the KPU Decree on February 12, 2009

No. 329 /15/I I /2009 of the PPDI Member Pencoretan listed

in DCT (PoE P-27) de facto and de jure all names

Future South Timorese DPRD candidate submitted

PPDI by KPU in capacity and its authority as an institution

A 2009 election organizer is legally core/canceling legal standing

The DPRD candidate of South Central Timor Regency from PPDI as name-

name is switched to list Candidate Fixed Elections 2009 and with this

in de facto can be said that there has been a vacancy for Member of the Member

DPRD South Central Timor Regency in the Permanent Candidates List of Elections 2009

so that the Political Party of PPDI as a 2009 Election participant with the Number of Urut 19

does not include a Member Candidate The DPRD of South Central Timorese Regency;

whose urgency becomes a logical consequence in the application of provisions

Article 218 paragraph (1) letter c Act No. 10 of 2008 on

House elections, DPD and DPRD;

Whereas Internal Political Party PPDI, against membership status

PPDI whose names are named in the Permanent Candidates List

Pernilu of 2009 has also revoked its membership in the ranks

of leadership and membership of PPDI as the Political Party Election participant

Year 2009, (Evidence P-11 to the Evidence P-26);

12

21. That the follow-up consequences of the inclusion of PPDI membership in the List

Permanent Candidate (DCT) of the 2009 Elections were the publication of the Letter of KPU

South Central Timor Regency No. 154 /KPU/TIMOR CENTER

SELATAN/VIII/2009 about the Candidate Notices candidate PPDI

(Proof P-29); and subsequently followed by Decree Number

152 /KPTS/DPP/PPDI/2009 on Reimbursions of the Member of the DPRD

Propinsi and DPRD District/City of the already unqualified PPDI

being a Member of the provincial DPRD and DPRD county/city as it is already

dismissed from PPDI membership (Evidence P-28);

In order to meet the mandate of the South Central Timorese Regency Letter

No. 154 /KPU/TIMOR MIDDLE SELATAN/VIII/2009 on Notices

A prospective replacement aimed at the DPC-PPDI regency of Timor Regency

Central South, including Amanah DPP-PPDI Chairman of the General Chairman H. Mentik

Budiwiyono and Sekjen Yoseph Williem Lea Wae addressed to the Pengurus

DPC-PPDI of South Central Timorese; then Applicant as a citizen

country Eligible members of the PPDI Political Party are set and

are submitted as candidates for the Central Timorese Council Member Council

South by Penggurus DPC-PPDI Regency de jure submitted as

Candidates South Central Timorese City Council replacement based on Surat

DPC-PPDI South East Timor Regency dated 27 May 2009 Number 031/

DPC-PPDI/TTS/V/2009 on Application Recommendation Successor

Member of the Council of TTS Regency from the 2009-2014 Period addressed to

Chairman of DPD-PPDI Province of Nusa Eastern Southeast and stews to the DPP

The Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party on 27 May 2009 (Evidence P-30);

21. Under the terms of Section 52 of the paragraph (1) and paragraph (4) of the Law Number

10 Years 2008 on the Election of U m u m Member of the DPR, DPD and DPRD,

which determines:

paragraph (1):

Bakal Candidate as referred to Section 51 Set up in the list

Candidate by the Political Party of each;

paragraph (4):

The list of Governing Candidates of the Regency/City is set by the Manager

The Political Party of the Election participants. district/Kota;

13

Then the follow-up to the assignment and submission of the Member Change candidate

South East Timor regency is based on the DPD PPDI Letter

East Nusa Tenggara Province dated 31 June 2009 Number 057 /DPD/PPD/PPDI/

IN/VII/2009 on Prospective Approvals (P-31 Evidence), Recommendation

Number 0 0 4/DPD/PPDI/REKDM/VII/2009 on Submission Recommendation

Replacement Candidate (Evidence P-32); DPP PPDI Number 072 /DPP/PPDI/

Ex/VII/2009 on the PPDI DPP Recommendation of Selected Candidates Reimbursed

Members of the Central Timorese DPRD period 2009-2014 (Evidence

P-33); As well as the Inauguration Support Letter to Sefriths Brother E.D. Nau

(applicant) as Member of the Council of Central South Timor Regency period

in 2009-2014 (Evidence P-34);

22. That background is published in the Central Timorese Central Regency Letter

South on August 10, 2009 Number 154 /KPU/TIMOR MIDDLE

SELATAN/VIII/2009 on Cancellation Of The Filing Of Prospective Replacement Candidates

Members Of The PPDI (Evidence P-29); is based on the Decree of the KPU dated

12 February 2009 Number 329 /15/II/2009 of the Member of the PPDI Seekers that

is listed in the 2009 Elections (DCT) Elections (Evidence P-27); so

thus the phrase "fixed list of candidates" as stated in

provisions of Article 218 verse (3) Act Number 10 of the>; which in principle cancels the Break

South Jakarta District Court in case a quo about legal standing

DPP-PPDI Chairman of the Drs. General Chairman Endung Sutrisno, M. BA and Sekjen V. Joes

Prananto, in casu;

19. Principle of fact filing Bakal Candidate Member of Central Timorese Regency

South submitted by Political Party that Legal Standings

according to Law (vide Putermination of Cassation on 15 October 2008 No. 686

K/PDT.Sus/2008) is synonymous with Bakal Calon a member of the District Council

South Central Timor period 2009-2014 was due to the whole

future South Timorese District Council candidate for the Republic of Central and Central Timor. derived from

PPDI membership has revoked its membership based on KPU Instruction

17

delivered to the South Central Timorese Regency and for

next followed by the submission process of the DPRD Member Change

South Central Timorese Regency of the Nomination of the Candidate PPDI In question;

30. If the next South East Timorese district KPU is past

set out candidates for the Central Timorese Council Member

which has been revoked by its membership of the PPDI and prospective members of the DPRD

Central Timorese regency South, then by itself the KPU Regency

South Central Timor, as the General Election Organiser of the Year

2009 has performed inconstitutional actions by even if with

various arguments for reasons for using the term "rehabilitation"

any reason arguments are also fixed it is an unconstitutional deed

by none of the articles or verses in Law No. 10

The 2008 Year of the Election of Representatives, DPD and DPRD which

lists the "exclusion phrase" to establish candidates Replace

DPR members, Provincial DPRD and County DPRD which have been shown to be not

eligible to be specified as Representative, DPRD Provincial and DPRD

Regency until it has been revoked by its membership in the Permanent Candidates List

Election 2009;

31. That with the facts as described above have been

called or cancelled all the candidates for the Timorese Regency Council

South Central, from PPDI membership in "Candidate List" Elections

2009, whereas In fact, the result of a valid vote count of the election of DPRD

South East Timor Regency results PPDI Regency Regency Regency

Central with No mo r Urut 19 has been legally awarded 1 (one)

the seat of the Member of the District Council of District South Central Timor Regency that must

set and be inducted in membership DPRD Central Timor Regency

South a quo, then it is no longer guideline on the terms of the phrase

"The List of Fixed Candidates" as stated in the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3)

Act Number 10 of the Year 2008 on Elections Members of the House, DPD and

DPRD, so that if it is constitutionally possible, mean no

there is another barrier to the guaranteed constitutional right

under the provisions of Article 28D paragraph (1) of the Constitution 1945 referred to:

18

IV. CONCLUSION

32. The provisions of Article 51 paragraph (1) of the letter a Law No. 24 of 2003

on the Constitutional Court in conjunction with the plea

The applicant as a member of the Indonesian Member of the Political Party of PPDI

was harmed by the prepared for the provisions of Article 218 paragraph (3) of the Act

No. 10 Year 2008 on the General Election of Representatives, DPD and DPRD

is the authority of the Constitutional Court of Justice in accepting

and checking the request of the applicant this;

33. If the provisions of Section 218 of the paragraph (3) of the Law No. 10 of 2008

on the Elections of the DPR, DPD and the DPRD, along about the phrase "Candidates List

Fixed" and the phrase "The Same Election Area" is not binding

against the applicant process as a Member of the Assembly Member

South Central Timor Regency then there is no longer

the impediation for the applicant to meet the constitutional rights demands

The applicant in establish the applicant as a Member of the District Council

South Central Timor;

34. That the Terms of Section 218 paragraph (3) of the Law Number 10 of 2008

about the General Election of the DPR Member, DPD and the DPRD are in no way have

binding powers against the Applicant's Redemption process as Members

DPRD County South Central Timor, then against the provisions of Article 218

paragraph (3) Act No. 10 of the Year 2008 should be formulated,

as follows:

" Speaker of the House, DPRD Province and DPRD district/city as

referred to in paragraph (1) replaced with Candidate of the Political Party Election participant

based on "Political Party leadership's decision is concerned".

V. PETITUM

Based on the things that have been described with the applicant's request, and

the evidence is attached, with this the petitioner --- REQUESTING -- to the Court

The Constitution, in order to please allow the verdict, as a result of the decision. following:

1. Accept and grant the applicant's request entirely;

2. Stating that the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act Number 10

In 2008 about the Election of Representatives, DPD and DPRD throughout

19

concerning the phrase "Permanent Candidate List" is contrary to the 1945 Constitution

in particular Article 28D paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution;

3. Stating that the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act Number 10

In 2008 about the Election of Representatives, DPD and the DPRD, along

concerns the phrase "The Candidate List" has no legal force

binding with all due to its laws;

4. Ordering the loading of this ruling in News of the State as

should be:

OR

If the Constitutional Court argues otherwise, the applicant pleads the

as well;

[2.2] Balanced That for Corroborate the control, the applicant submitted

a letter/written proof given the Proof of P-1 to the Evidence P-40 as

following:

1. Proof of P-1: Photocopy Act No. 10 of 2008 on

General Elections of the People's Representative Council, Council

Regional Representative, and the Regional People's Representative Council;

2. Evidence P-2: Photocopied Act No. 2 of 2008 on Party

Politics;

3. Evidence P-3: Photocopy Card Members of the Democratic Party of Democracies

Indonesia and the Population Tag Card a.n Sefriths E.D. Nau;

4. Proof of p-4: Photocopy form model b of the submission of prospective members

DPRD county number 007 /DPC-PPDI/TIMOR CENTER

SELATAN/VIII/2008;

5. Proof P-5: Photocopied Copy Number 988 /PDT.G/2008/PN-

JKT.Sel;

6. Evidence P-6: Photocopy Of The Supreme Court's Consent Notice

Number 686K/Pdt.Sus ./2008;

7. Evidence P-7: Photocopy Form Model EB DPRD Kab/City News Event

Number 114 /MIDDLE EAST TIMOR/V/2009 on

Redemption of Election Results, Party Seat Acquisition

Politics of the General Election Participant and Prospective Requirement Selected

20

Member of the Regional People's Representative Council of Timor Regency

Central South Election Year 200Candidate List" is omitted, then

the relation to the phrase formula "The same constituency" is

is fixed (constant) or unequivocal meaning of the meaning of

how to assign a Candidate for the Political Party by based

in the same electoral region referred to;

Nevertheless that is de facto one member of the DPRD

South East Timorese Regency results The election of U m u m in 2009 from

PPDI is the constitutional right of the applicant as a Member of the Poiitic Party PPDI

which had been qualified as9;

8. Evidence P-8: Photocopy Form Model EB 1 DPRD Kab/City Count

Voice and Designation Acquisition Political Party Seats

General Elections Of The Regional Representative Council

District/City In The 2009 General Election Province

East Nusa Tenggara, South Central Timorese Regency,

South Central Timor Selection Area 1;

9. Evidence P-9: Photocopy Form Model EB 3.1 DPRD Kab/City List

Elected Member of the Regional People's Representative Council

General Election Year 2009 Central Timor Regency <f Democracy

Indonesia Decree No. 1529 /SK/DPP/PPDI/XI/08

about the Structure, Composition, and Personnel of the Council

The leadership of the Democratic Party of the Democratic Party of the People's Republic of America, the Council of the Democratic Party. Indonesia

South Central Timorese Masa Bhakti 2008-2013;

40. Evidence P-40: Photocopy of the State Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia

In 1945;

In addition, the applicant submitted 2 (two) witnesses named Sutrisno

Rachmadi and Imanuel A.O. Tapatab as well as 1 (one) expert named Samuel

Frederik Lena gave the caption under oath at the hearing

on 22 June 2010, as follows:

1. Witness Sutrisno Rachmadi

-Witness is one of the Chairman of the Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party (PPDI);

-There is a dualism in the affairs of the Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party beginning

with the Munaslu in Kupang in 2008. Then, the arrangement

new affairs was submitted to the Department of Law and Human Rights. But

The Department of Law and Human Rights did not receive, then filed a lawsuit

to the High Court of State Tata Effort. And the new business

won that time. Later, the Government (Minister of Law and Human Rights)

with the PPDI caretaker under the leadership of Mentik Budiwiyono and

Joseph Williem Lea Wea submitted Cassation to the Supreme Court. During the

process in the Supreme Court long enough to be the nominating process of listing

candidates in the General Election. At the time it was already delivering

to the Electoral Commission that there was still a dispute over the Court

the Great, including the news of his show. But the KPU is based on the date rules that

are already set to process the Candidate List as well as the list

Candidates remain based on PTUN results. Because after the PTUN results,

its decision is immediate and binding. So the Minister of Law and Human Rights

immediately issued SK KepengBUSINESS;

25

KPU holds to SK Minister of Law and Human Rights regarding the arrangement

new management on behalf of the General Chairman Endung Sutrisno and Secretary General Joes

Prananto;

-That on 15 October 2008 the verdict was out Cassation of the Court

the Supreme stating that the legitimate is PPDI General Chairman Mentik

Budiwiyono and Sekjen Joseph Williem Lea Wea. It sends a letter

to the KPU. The KPU pretenses to have established a Permanent Candidate List;

After receiving the return of SK, because the party's management of SK should

exit the Department of Law and Human Rights that based on its consideration

is the result of the MA's casings. It is coordinating to the KPU, and the KPU

convees that if it does not accept the Candidate List will be fired.

At the time it fired after communicating with the KPU;

After everything was fired and at the time It was hoped that at the time of being fired

there was actually no Permanent Candidate List in the pencoblosan letter.

it was still printed when his side asking for the KPU was already already

printed. The reason for the KPU is already in print. His side can be accepted but

they promise that we'll be next. The elections are still running

for this reason it is more concerned with the country's problems. All proposals from

KPU followed, then proceeded to Election and at the time also did

communication that by having coblos an image sign.

By the time it issued the Circular Letter to the entire administrator

DPC and DPD across Indonesia that since the Candidate List is already

it is printed that create a constituent to try the image tag. More

pickblos the image, not trying to Keep List of Fixed Voters. So, his side

fired all. After the election results were obtained, the Central Leadership Council

conducted the Rapimnas which invited the entire DPD to cycle the conditions

. The decision was the time it was submitted to the branch or

the area if it had a seat get the time seats of each branch.

So there are several branches that submitted a list of potential replacements. And

there are several branches that rehabilitate the names that are on the Candidates List

Stay. The DPP because of the results of Rapimnas only approved any of the suggestions

of the branch. Specifically, the TTS didn't apply. There was a filing

26

the candidate is Sefriths. And his side issued SK that the replacement

to the Sefriths;

Once the MA issued its case it remains demanding DPP over the name

Endung and Yos Prananto to PTUN also to prosecute should not be

using the emblem and a PPDI image sign, and it is already

won also in PTUN that the Endung Sutrisno and Joes Prananto not

may use the PPDI emblem and image sign;

2. Witness Imanuel A.O. Tapatab -Witness is a Legislative Candidate from PPDI version Mentik and Joseph

Williem Lea Wea;

-Pirights submitted a list of legislative candidates to the Regency KPU, but could not

acomodir to verified;

-Then his side submitted the casings to the Supreme Court. Next there is

a decision that states that his side is won. Thus

The decision of the South Jakarta State Court which won Endung

Sutrisno and Yos Prananto as the Secretary-General was canceled by law;

-Then his side did campaign, but because of that time the letter

the decision who won his side still in October so still

there was time to change the DCT that had been set by the KPU himself. So

it still moves to do the campaign as Caleg;

-Then the KPU refuses that since it has already been printed DCT has been unable to

be changed again. The KPU issued a single letter to the DPP that the DCT had already been already

printed it nonetheless sought and granted the satisfaction of performing

campaigns and according to a letter from the KPU that the DCT was in the ballot

invalid. Invalid but if the political party obtained a significant vote

to obtain a seat then the vote was still considered valid;

3. Expert Samuel Frederik Lena -Expert at the Faculty of Law of the University of Nusa Cendana;

-The Substance Section 218 verses (3) Basic Law No. 10 of 2008

is intended to guarantee a fair legal certainty. And that is, in

the nature is not contrary to the constitution's substance

The Basic Law of 1945 but its implementation is absolute

27

conditional constitutional. That is constitutional only to the extent-

certain terms are met during a fair as intended

in Section 22E paragraph (1) of the Basic Law of 1945, as long as it guarantees

legal certainty as referred to in Article 28D paragraph (1) and during

refer to the sovereignty of the people as referred to in Article 1

paragraph/p>

38. Evidence P-38: Photocopy of the Board of the Central Leadership of the Democratic Party of Democracy

Indonesia Decree No. 1305 /SK/DPP/PPDI/VII/08

about the Structure, Composition and Personnel of the Leadership Council

24

Branch of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Democracies

South Central Timor Masa Bhakti 2008-2013;

39. Evidence P-39: Photocopy of the Board of the Central Leadership of the Democratic Party o (2) of the Basic Law of 1945. The opposite is constitutionally certainly

in certain conditions it is contrary to the constitution that

during the cause of injustice and or does not guarantee the legal certainty

and or not to realize sovereignty the people, all in context

elect a representative of the people through the Election;

-Thus the final measure of the conditions in question is

in its form the purpose of the Legislative Elections as set forth in Article 22E

paragraph (2) of the Basic Law of 1945, in se of Representatives

Local people stating:

"Nomination of House members, Provincial DPRD and district/city DPRD

as referred to in paragraph (1) is replaced with candidates from the list of permanent candidates

The Political Party of the Election participants. the same election region based on the letter

party leadership decisions conflicting politics ".

The provisions above in particular the phrase" Permanent Candidate List " by the applicant are considered

contrary to the provisions of Article 27 paragraph (1), Section 28C paragraph (2), Section 28D

paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) and Section 28H verse (2) UUD 1945. The government can

deliver an explanation as follows:

1. That Act No. 10 of 2008 on Elections

Members of the People's Representative Council, House of Representatives, and the Council

The Regional People's Representative, is as the basis of a foothold of the whole

sequence of activities/stages Assembly of House Members Elections,

DPD and DPRD provinces, districts/cities, from start of party political parties

Elections, voting rights, number of seats, voter lists, nomination members,

31

voting, the assignment of candidates is elected to the replacement of the candidate

elected.

2. That the use of the "Permanent Candidate List" (DCT) in the holding

Legislative Elections (DPR, DPD and provincial DPRD, county/city) in Indonesia,

has a closely related philosophical, juridical, and technical significance

The event stage is as follows:

a. Philosophically, the existence of the DCT was one of the documents that

served as the basis by the Election Organizer and the Political Party for

introducing and simultaneously showing the people who

who would be his deputy. in his constituency, and expected

the people will be able to know definitively who the eligible candidate is chosen

to represent his interests.

b. Judicially, the existence of the DCT is to strengthen constitutional rights

candidate members and the public to be assured of a fair legal certainty

and equal treatment before the law. Any person who has been

listed his name in the DCT will be granted bail and protection

to get the same treatment in the overall Election process

and other processes after the Election, e.g. the change of candidates selected or

known as an intertime replacement (PAW).

c. Juridically, if not a DCT would have resulted in the

legal uncertainty, for example if it would be an interchange of interchange

Time (PAW) Legislative member [vide Article 218 paragraph (1) Act

Number 10 Year 2008 about the Board Member Elections

People's Representative, Regional Representative Council, and House of Representatives

The People of the Regions], because if there is no DCT document, then who and

how to determine the Legislative members next

that will be made for that replacement.

d. Technically, the DCT document will be related to the means and infrastructure

staging the Election (Election logistics) among other voting papers with

the photo and list of prospective members of the legislature, given the system of determination

members The legislature was elected by using the most votes (vide

Putermination of the Constitutional Court Number 22 and Number 24 /PUU-VII/2008).

32

3. That the DCT designation by the KPU is a proposal of the participant's political party

Election, which must go through the verification phase to match the potential

with qualification requirements as defined in Article 50

Act No. 10 of 2008 on Member Elections

The People's Representative Council, the Regional Representative Council, and the House of Representatives

The Regional People, next the KPU again will do verification

the terms of the Section. It was not until the DCT proposal of the political party

Election participants directly became the DCT.

In addition to these things above, the use of DCT in all stages

holding the election, according to the Government is a policy option (legal

policy) law-forming (The Joint People's Representative Council) President)

to organize and design for the election to be accomplished

well, which in turn may result in a representative of the people

quality, accountability in accordance with choice and expectations

the public.

Also according to the Government, the provisions are being asked to be tested, instead

has given legal certainty (legal certenty, rechtzekerheid) against any

people who have been qualified and proposed by Election participants political party

to participate and compete in the legislative elections

that, according to the Government provisions a quo has been in line with

the constitutional mandate.

CONCLUSION

Based on the above explanation, the Government pleads to the Noble

Chairperson/Assembly of the Constitutional Court of Justice who inspected, disconnected and

courted the request for testing Act No. 10 of 2008 on

The General Election of the Member of the House of Representatives, the Regional Representative Council,

and the Regional People's Representative Council on the Country Basic Law

Republic of Indonesia in 1945, may present its ruling as follows:

33

1. Stating that the applicant does not have a legal standing (legal

standing);

2. Rejecting the applicant's testing request for the whole or at no-

charges that the applicant test is not acceptable

(niet ontvankelijk verklaard);

3. Received overall Government information;

4. Stating the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) in particular the phrase "Permanent Candidate List" Act No. 10 of 2008 about the General Election

Member of the House of Representatives, Regional Representative Council, and the Council

The Regional People's Representative. not contrary to the provisions of Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28C paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) as well as Article 28H

paragraph (2) of the Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945.

Yet if Your Majesty the Chairman/Assembly of the Constitutional Court of Justice

argues for another, please the wise and adio-adim verdict (ex aequo et

bono).

[2.4] A draw that in the June 29, 2010 trial has been heard

oral or read-written statements of the Commission Related to the Commission

General Election of South East Timor Regency and written caption Commission

The General Election that is at its center as follows:

1. South Central Timorese Election KPU

The Authority Of The Constitutional Court 1. That the Election Commil standing) or not, as

defined by Article 51 of the paragraph (1) of the Law No. 24 of 2003

on the Constitutional Court and based on the Court's ruling

The preceding Constitution (vide Putermination Number 006 /PUU-III/2005 and The Number Of Numbers

11 /PUU-V/2007).

On the presumption of the applicant stating that the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph

(3) Act Number 10 of 2008 on the Election of Members

The People's Representative Council, the Regional Representative Council, and the Houssion of the South East Timor Regency as

Organizing Elections respecting the duties and authority of the Court

The Constitution as set in the Basic Law of 1945 and

Act Number 24 Year 2003 on the Constitutional Court;

2. That the Election Commission of the South East Timor Regency as

Election organizers respect for testing requests against

provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act Number 10 of 2008 on

Member General Elections House of Representatives, House of Representatives

Regions, RegionalMasa Bhakti 200-2013;

5. Proof of PT-5: Photocopy of the Regency Election Commission

South Central Timor Number 17 /MIDDLE EAST TIMOR

SELATAN/V/2009 on Establishing Seats and

Redemption of the Board of Representatives Members of the House

South Central Timorese District People Are In

41

General Election Year 2009;

6. Proof of PT-6: Photocopy of the Minister of Law and Rights

Man of the Republic ofce Pelokila

11) Nena Yuliana Pena

12) Maksi Melianus Ardi Paulus Ottu

13) Sulklifi Alimin, A. Md

14) Job Lesly Pianus Bissilisin

15) Farida Arieani Bain

5. That of the 15 (fifteen) of the name of the Regional Representative Council of the Regions

South Central Timorese regency proposed by DPC PPDI was not present

the name of Sefriths sibling E. D. Nau (applicant);

6. That is based on the Decree of the Minister of Law and Human Rights Number M. HH-

76.AH.11.01 of 2008 on the enactment of the arrangement of the Board of Directors

The head of the PPDI Centre for the service of 2005-2010. General Chairman H. Mentik Budiwiyono,

Secretary General Joseph Williem Lea Wea, DPC Administrator PPDI County

38

South Central Timor is Sefriths E. D. Nau as Chairman and Joni Armi

Konay, A. Md as Secretary, (Evidence PT-6);

7. That the General Elections of the House of Representatives, DPD and DPRD were held on

on April 9, 2009;

8. That is based on the South Central Timorese DPC Chairman's letter

No. 026 /DPC-PPDI/TIMOR MIDDLE SELATAN/V/2009, on May 12, 2009,

on the Shipping of SK Dismissal by DPP General Chairman PPDI H. Mentik

Budiwiyono and Secretary General Yoseph Williem Lea Wea did

The dismissal of 15 people listed in the DCT, (Evidence PT-7);

9. That in accordance with the Decree of the Timorese General Election Commission

South Central Number 17 /KPU-TIMOR CENTRAL SELATAN/V/2009 on

Establishing The Acquisition Of Political Party Seats and Nomination Candidate Elect

Representative Council The people of the South East Timor County District

2009 dated 23 May 2009 set 40 (forty) seats and candidates

Elected as many as 39 (thirty-nine) people.

10. That the reprieve of the Board of Representatives of the Regency of the District

South Central Timor from PPDI as all candidates in the DCT

were fired;

11. That is de facto and de jure KPU of South Central Timor Regency

has not set any candidate selected from PPDI and is reviewing it with

pledging instructions from the KPU via Letter Number 124 /KPU/TT5/VI/2009

June 8, 2009 (Evidence PT-8);

12.That via Surat Number 001 /PS-MAS/TIMOR MIDDLE SELATAN/II/

2010 dated February 12, 2010 with regard to Requesting Candidate

Replacement Member of the Regional People's Representative Council. Timor Regency

South Central of PPDI addressed to the General Election Commission

South Central Timorese Regency, Applicant by mobilizing

a society of 4 (four) districts that exist in Election Region 1

to be appointed to the Regional Representative Council of the District

South Central Timor, (Evidence PT-9);

13. That this attempt was made to the applicant by submitting the applicant Letter and

with the public coming directly to the Office of the General Election Commission

District, the Provincial Electoral Commission and the Electoral Commission

39

Center;

14.That against the applicant's efforts at the top of the Commission

The General Election torsed it by issuing a numbered letter

248 /KPU/III/2010 on the Candidate of the PPDI Member April 27, 2010

(Evidence PT-10).

V. PETITUM

That based on things done by the Election Commission

County, the Provincial Electoral Commission and Central Election Commission

as the General Election organisers by surpassing the evidence, begging

to the Constitutional Court deigned to give the following verdict:

1. Reject the applicant's request for the whole;

2. Stating that the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act No. 10

2008 of the General Election of the Regional Representative Council, the Board

The Regional Representative and the Regional People's Representative Council as well as the whole

Commission rule The General Election as an implementation rule is

valid and not in conflict with the Constitution of the Republic of the Republic

Indonesia in 1945;

Or

If the Constitutional Court argues otherwise please provide The one that is

is fair.

VI. CONCLUSION

1. Test Rights to the Law are the competence of

The Constitutional Court under the Constitution of the Republic of the Republic

Indonesia in 1945 and Law No. 24 of 2003 on

Constitutional Court;

2. That Act No. 10 of 2008 [Article 218 paragraph (3)] as

The Organic Act and the entire Election Commission Regulation

as its implementation rules are legal and binding as well

as the basis for the foundation of the Act. the law in the holding of the Legislative Elections

Year 2009;

3. State Election Commission of South Central Timor as

40

General Election organizers in South Central Timor regency

under the Act and regulations applicable in stages

programs in the limitless time timeout.

In addition, for Corroboration of the Commission on the Commission

The South Central Timorese General Election submitted a written proof

which was given a Proof of PT-1 until the PT-10 Evidence is as follows:

1. Proof of PT-1: Photocopy of the Regency Election Commission

South Central Timor Number 47 /KPU/TIMOR CENTER

SELATAN/X/2008 on Redemption of the Permanent Candidate List

Member of the House of Representatives of the District District

Timor Middle South In The General Election Of The Year

2009;

2. Proof of PT-2: Photocopy of the Regulation General Election Commission Number 20

Year 2008 on Change Against Regulation

General Election Commission Number 09 Year 2008 on

Tahapan, Program and Expiration Of the Election

General House of Representatives Rakayat, Dewan

Regional Representative and Regional People's Representative Council

Year 2009;

3. Proof of PT-3: Photocopy of the General Election Commission Number 2545.1/

15 /VIII/2008 on the Delivery of Address List and Name

The DPP Parpol Election Participant 2009 is dated 16

August 2008;

4. Proof of PT-4: Photocopy Decree No. 189 /SK-DPC/DPP/PPDI/

II/08 on Structure, Composition and Personnel of the Board

Leadership of the Branch of the Indonesian Democratic Enforcement Party

South Timor Tengah mission

South Korea receives the nomination file of the Member of the House of Representatives

The People of the South Central Timorese County District of the Party Governing

The legitimate politics of South Central Timor Regency levels;

3. That the administrator of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Timorese Regency

South Central is Nithanel Yunus Seri as Chairman and Secretary

Ayub Lesly Bissilisin and Chairman of the DPP PPDI is Drs. H. Endung Sutrisno,

M. BA., M. M and Secretary General over Drs. V. Joe

The acquisition of the 2009 election results tally will be but in terms of

54

factor beyond the capabilities or unexpected circumstances experienced by the Party

PPDI as a 2009 Election participant formerly of KPU, KPU

Province, KPU District/Old City receive a candidate submission from

A version of the PPDI legal standing was declared invalid based

The decision of the Court oRegency

South Central as Applicant.

By therefore legal standing (legal standing) the applicant is in the request

testing the a quo Act no meets requirements as

set in Section 51 of the paragraph (1) of the Act The Constitutional Court and

limits according to the Constitutional Court Decree Number 006 /PUU-III/2005 and

No. 011 /PUU-V/2007 past.

By control of that, the House of Representatives of the People of the People is requesting that the Lord/

The Assembly of Judges The Constitutional Court has wisely stated that

The applicant is rejected (void) or at least not being declared acceptable

(niet ontvankelijk verklaard).

Yet if the Chairman/Assembly of the Constitutional Court argues otherwise, the following

is presented to the People's Representative Council regarding the matter

testing the Election Act.

2. Material Testing of the Law Number 10 of 2008 on the General Election of the People's Representative Council, the Regional Representative Council and the Regional People's Representative Council

That the applicant in the plea a quo, postulate that the right

its constitutionality has been harmed by the enactment of the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph

(3) Act Number 10 of the Year 2008 on the Election of the Members

The House of Representatives, the Regional Representative Council and the Council Representative

The People of the Regions, so the applicant to date has not been established as a

Member of the DPRD South Central Timorese Regency period 2009-2014.

Against the proposed applicant, the DPR argued with

the caption as follows:

52

1. That the applicant in the request a quo suggests " is

the legal standing dispute between DPP-PPDI Chairman of the General Chairman H.

Mentik Budiwiyono and Sekjen Joseph Wiliem Lea Wea against DPP-PPDI

version Chief General Officer Drs. Endung Sutrisno, MBA and Drs. Secretary-General V.

Joes Pranoto. In addition there is a legal dispute between Menkumham

against the DPP PPDI version of the Chairman of the Drs. General Chairman Endung Sutrisno,

MBA and Drs. Secretary-General V. Joes Pranoto ". (vide: Plea a quo figure 24

without a page);

2. That in the a quo request the applicant also suggests " related

with the legal process and dispute the law has given birth

the legal norm of Jakarta State Court of Justice on 11 November

2008 Number 988 /PDT.G/2008/PN.JKT.sel nor the Court of Justice

Agung RI dated 15 October 2008 No. 686 K/PID.SUS/ 2008

with the Federal Election Commission Institute as an institution

country 2009 Election organizers processed List Redemption

Permanent Candidates (DCT) 2009 elections by Reject the submission

Bakal Candidate DPRD County submitted for specified in the List

Permanent Candidate of 2009 from the list of candidates for the County DPRD submitted

DPC-PPDI South Central Timir County including the applicant

is submitted as a Member of the Central Timorese Council for Councillors

South Dapil South Central Timor I Number Urut 1 ". (vide Plea

a quo figure 17 without a page);

3. That of the applicant's postulate, the House of Representatives view that

the problem of the applicant in the plea a quo

in fact is the party's internal affairs related to the validity

of the PPDI DPP business. lawful

The rightful chairman of the PPDI DPP is the Chairman of the PPDI DPP which is

in the leadership of DPP General Chairman H. Mentik Budiwiyono and

Secretary-General Joseph Williem Lea Wea by Decision A court that

has a fixed legal force. Therefore, according to the House of Representatives this

in fact is the subject of the application of the court ruling that

a force of law fixed (inkracht) so that the dispute resolution efforts

53

the law is clearly in no relevance to

the constitutionality of the norm Article 218 paragraph (3) Act a quo;

4. That the DPR does not agree with the applicant's control in the application

a quo which suggests the phrase "Candidate List remains" in the designation

The successor to the member of the Central Timorese City Council is

gave birth to a legal uncertainty for the applicant to be set as

Member of the Central Timorese Council of Central South Timor from the party of the Election

2009 (PPDI) ". (vide Plea a quo figure 26 without pages);

5. That of the applicant's postulate, the House argued instead the phrase

"A List of Permanent Candidates" set in provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3)

The a quo Act instead to provide legal certainty for

all parties. The political participants of the 2009 election, therefore need to be understood

by the applicant, that the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) of the Act a quo

apply to all the political parties of the 2009 Election participants,

including the applicable for the applicant himself, due to the provisions of Article 218

paragraph (3) of the Act a quo on Set the submission process

replacement of the selected candidate recommended by the decision letter

the leadership of the polotic party is concerned, if it meets the requirements that

specified Section 218 of the paragraph (1) of the Act quo that is: " Reimburd

The elected candidate of the House, DPD, and provincial DPRD, county/city

is done if the selected candidate is concerned:

a. dead of the world;

b. resigned;

c. no longer eligible to be a member of the House, DPD, DPRD

province or DPRD county/kota;

d. evidently a political criminal election or

forgery of a document based on the court ruling that

obtaining a fixed legal force ";

6. That the applicant in the a quo is postulate "understanding" List

The Permanent Candidate " is more likely to accommodate the formality of the formalities

the candidate has been submitted by the political party that gets the seat. tutionality

attributable to the enactment of the provisions of Article 218 of paragraph (3) of the Act

a quo;

8. That on the basis of the description, the House argued that actually

there is no constitutional rights loss experienced by the applicant as

due to the enactment of the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) of the Act a quo by

because the applicant is not deterred by its constitutional rights guaranteed in

61

South; thus void by law undo,

so it is clear that this is clear. is not a question of the constitutionality of a

the norm is being tested;

8. That there is a constitutional loss that the applicant exists as

as a result of the phrase "Permanent Candidate List" set in Article 218 of paragraph (3)

The a quo is not appropriate, as well as no

The relevance. Since it is clear that the enactment of Article 218

paragraph (3) of the Act a quo does not stand alone but is related to

terms that must be met in Article 218 of paragraph (1) of the Act

a quo;

9. That the case of a KPU is considered detrired to the applicant because

does not specify the applicant as a Member of the District Council

South Central Timor as the applicant is postulate, according to

The DPR is not a matter of The constitutionality of a norm Article 218

paragraph (3) of the Act a quo, but more to the application of the law.

As is the case of a powerful court ruling

the law remains linked to the propriety of the law. The authorized PPDI DPP leadership

who is considered the applicant, is a matter of internal party

which cannot be attributed to the question of the constitutionality of a norm

Article 218 paragraph (3) of the Act a quo;

55

10. That based on the description, it is clear that the issue

the constitutional rights loss of the applicant is true

is not a matter of constitutionality, but is a matter of

the application of the law by The KPU and the institution associated with the ruling

a court of law that has a fixed legal force related to

the validity of the PPDI DPP Chairman.

That therefore, the House of Representatives argues that the provisions of Article 218

paragraph (3) of the Law Number 10 of 2008 do not conflict with the Article

27 paragraph (1), Section 28C paragraph (2), Section 28D paragraph (1) and paragraph (3), and Article 28H

paragraph (2) of the Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia in 1945.

Thus the DPR implores the Speaker/Assembly of the Constitutional Court which

His majesty gives an amar the verdict as follows:

1. Stating that the applicant does not have a legal standing (legal

standing), so the applicant's request must be declared not to be

received (niet ontvankelijk verklaard);

2. Whether the applicant is denied for the whole or not-

may not have been accepted

(niet ontvankelijk verklaard);

3. The DPR's description was accepted for the whole;

4. Stating the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) of the Law Number 10 of the Year

2008 on the General Election of the Member of the House of Representatives, the Board

The Regional Representative, and the Regional People's Representative Council are not at odds

with the provisions Article 27 paragraph (1), Article 28C paragraph (2), Article 28D paragraph (1) and

paragraph (3), and Article 28H paragraph (2) of the Constitution of the Republic of the Republic

Indonesia Year 1945;

5. Stating the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) of the Law No. 10 Year

2008 of the General Election of the People's Representative Council, the Board

The Regional Representative, and the Regional People's Representative Council remain

the power of the law. binding.

[2.6] weighed that the applicant submitted its conclusions, Government, Council

The People ' s Representative, and the Related Parties did not submit a conclusion;

56

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

something that happened at 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 intent and purpose of the application is regarding

testing the constitutionality of Section 218 of the paragraph (3) Act Number 10 of the Year

2008 on the General Election of the Board Member People's Representative, Council

Regional Representative and House of Representatives of the Regions along the phrase "List

Permanent Candidate" (Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia 2008 No. 51,

Additional Gazette of the Republic of Indonesia No. 4836, next called

Act 10/2008) against Article 28D of paragraph (1) of the Country Basic Law Republic

Indonesia Year 1945, called UUD 1945;

[3.2] Draw that before entering the subject, the Constitutional Court

The Constitution, subsequently called the Court, would consider it

first things as follows:

1. The Court's authority to examine, prosecute, and disconnect

plea a quo;

2. Legal standing (legal standing) applicant;

Against both of those above, the Court argued as

following:

The authority of the Court

[3.3] weighed that under Article 24C of the paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution.

stated, " The Constitutional Court is authorized to prosecute at the first level

and the last of its verdict is final to test the legislation against

The Basic Law, severing the jurisdiction of the agency's authority country that

Its authority is given by the Act Base, dissolving the dissolution

political party, and severing the dispute about the outcome of the general election ", which

then repeated again in Article 10 of the paragraph (1) letter of the Number

24 Year 2003 on the Court Constitution (State of the Republic of Indonesia

57

2003 Number 98, Additional State Sheet Re [public Indonesia Number

4316, next called Act MK) stated, " Constitutional Court

authorities prosecute at first level and The last of the term is

final for: a. Examining legislation against the State Basic Law

Republic of Indonesia of 1945 ", juncto Article 29 paragraph (1) letter a Act

Number 48 Year 2009 on the Power of Justice (Republican Gazette

Indonesia Year 2009 Number 157, Additional Gazette Republic of State

Indonesia Number 5076) stated, Constitutional Court of authority

prosecute at first and last rate the verdict is final for:

a. Examining the laws against the Constitution of the Republic of the Republic

Indonesia of 1945 ";

[3.4] Draws That The Applicant's plea is to test

the constitutionality of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act 10/2008 throughout the phrase. "List of candidates

Fixed" against UUD 1945, which is one of the Court's authority,

so that it is therefore the court of authority to examine, prosecute,

and cut off a quo;

Legal Occupation (Legal Standing) The applicant

[3.5] Stated that under Article 51 paragraph (1) The MK law and

explanation, ATAN/V/2009 on

Establishing The Acquisition Of Political Party Seats and Nomination Candidate Elect

Board The People's Representative of the South East Timor County District of the Year

2009 dated 23 May 2009 established 40 (forty) seats and candidates

Elected by 39 (thirty-nine) people;

-That Suspension Of The Designation Of Selected Candidates District DPRD member

South Central Timor from PPDI because of all the candidates there in DCT

being fired;

-That is de facto and de jure KPU of cal party obtained a vote which

is significant to obtain a seat then the vote remains considered valid;

3. Expert Samuel Frederik Lena

The Substance Of Article 218 verses (3) Act Number 10 of 2008

is intended to guarantee a fair legal certainty. And that is,

on the nature of not contradictory to substance

Constitution of the Constitution of 1945 but its implementation is absolute

constitutional conditional. Meaning is constitutional only to the extent

certain terms are met as long as fair as

referred to in Article 22E paragraph (1) of the Basic Law of 1945, during

guarantees the legal certainty as It is referred to in Article 28D paragraph

(1) and as long as it states the sovereignty of the people as

referred to in Article 1 of the paragraph (2) of the Basic Law of 1945. Instead

certainly constitutionally in certain conditions it is

contrary to the constitution that is during incandation of injustice

and or does not guarantee legal certainty and or not to realize

65

the sovereignty of the people, all in the context of the chosen representatives of the people through

elections;

Experts suggest as follows:

1. In order for the phrase to be replaced with a candidate from the DCT in Article 218 of the paragraph (3)

Law 10/2008 on Elections by the Constitutional Court is declared not

is absolute but is the Constitutional conditionally i.e.

only if asas and the constitutional purpose of holding the election

manifests or otherwise is declared constitutional under certain conditions

that is if the principle and the constitutional purpose of the election are not

again realized, if the vice-people unrealized means no

constitutional;

2. In order for the Constitutional Court to provide an official interpretation of it

addendum in the description of Article 218 of paragraph (3) Law Number

10 Years 2008 that the phrase was replaced with the candidate DCT only

applies to the extent of DCT still exists which is eligible, however

if from the DCT no longer qualies then the members of the legislature

replace referred, proposed by the Parpol Election participant who

obtained the seat listed in the state news;

[3.13] A draw that the Court has heard of the Government ' s caption,

The rest has been deciphed at the sitting section, which in just

describes as follows:

That what the applicant is experiencing is the whole

description of the appeal, not the issue of which relating to the issue

the constitutionality of the objection to the norms of the Act which is being moved to

tested it, but in relation to the question of the applicant with

the Political Party administrator of the PPDI itself (which is currently the case of the ")". dispute

in law), or as non-non-related discontent/

disapproval of the applicant with the Decree of the Central Timorese Regency KPU

South.

That use of "Permanent Candidate List" (DCT) in the holding of elections

legislature (DPR, DPD and DPRD Provincial, County/City) in Indonesia,

66

has a closely related philosophical, juridical, and technical meaning to

the overall staging stage of the Election, which is the following:

a. Philosophically, the existence of the DCT was one of the documents that

served as the basis by the Election Organizer and the Political Party for

introducing and simultaneously showing the people who

who would be his deputy. in his constituency, and expected

the people will be able to know definitively who the eligible candidate is selected

to represent his interests;

b. Judicially, the existence of the DCT is to strengthen constitutional rights

candidate members and the public to be assured of a fair legal certainty

and equal treatment before the law. Any person who has been

listed his name in the DCT will be granted bail and protection

to get the same treatment in the overall Election process

and other processes after the Election, e.g. the change of candidates selected or

known for intertime replacement (PAW);

c. Judicially, if there is no DCT, it will cause

legal uncertainty, for example if it will be the interchange

Time (PAW) legislative member (vide Article 218 paragraph (1) Act

Number 10 Year 2008 about the Board of Councillors

People's Representative, Regional Representative Council, and House of Representatives

The People of the Regions), because if there is no DCT document, then who and

how to determine the legislative members the next one

will be made a replacement of that;

d. Technically, the DCT document will be related to the means and infrastructure

staging the Election (Election logistics) among other voting papers with

the photo and list of prospective members of the legislature, given the system of determination

members The legislature was elected by using the most votes (vide

verdict of Constitutional Court Number 22 and Number 24 /PUU-VII/2008).

[3.14] Draw that the Court has heard the Related Party ' s caption

The Central Timorese Central Election Commission and the written caption

The Electoral Commission, which is at its office as follows:

67

1. Elections Commission of the South East Timor Regency

-That under the Decree of the Minister of Law and Human Rights No. M. HH-

76.AH.11.01 of 2008 on the enactment of the arrangement of the Board of Councilmen

The head of the PPDI Centre for the service of 2005-2010. General Chairman H. Mentik Budiwiyono,

Secretary General Yoseph Williem Lea Wea, DPC Administrator PPDI County

The South Central Timor is Sefriths E. D. Nau as Chairman and Joni Armi

Konay, A. Md as Secretary;

- That is based on the DPC Chairman's letter PPDI South East Timor regency

No. 026 /DPC-PPDI/TIMOR MIDDLE SELATAN/V/2009 dated May 12, 2009

concerning the Shipping of SK Dismissal by DPP General Chairman PPDI H. Mentik

Budiwiyono and Secretary General Joseph Williem Lea Wea performs

The dismissal of 15 people listed in the DCT;

-That in accordance with the Election Commission Decision of the Regency of Timor

South Central Number 17 /KPU-TIMOR CENTRAL SEL">

64

2. Witness Imanuel A.O. Tapatab

Piise submitted a list of legislative candidates to the County KPU, but it was not

accommodated to be verified;

That his side submitted a cassation to the Supreme Court. Next there is

a decision that states that his side is won. Thus

The decision of the South Jakarta State Court which won Endung

Sutrisno and Joes Prananto as the Secretary-General was canceled by law;

That his side did campaign, but because of that time the letter

the paragraph (3) of the Law 10/2008 which

states, " Candidates for the DPR, provincial DPRD, and district/city DPRD

as referred to in paragraph (1) are replaced with candidate of the Permanent Candidate List ",

up to this plea filed to the Court, not setting

The applicant as a Member of the Central Timorese Council of Central Central Timor from PPDI,

so that there is a legal uncertainty over who is the representative of PPDI

in the Central Timorese Regency of South Korea, Similarly, with the KPU

the district/city does not provide any legal certainty;

[3.21] It is calculated based on the description in such consideration

above the Court of opinion, that the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) Act 10/2008

related to the phrase "Permanent Candidate List" raises a legal vacuum that

result of a legal uncertainty in the event of a problem

as the a quo case, which is when all the names in the Candidates List remain

are already out of date for being dismissed as such.

case a quo is related to a leadership dispute, while on the other

there is a vacancy of a member of the DPRD that should be filled by the representatives of the political party

concerned;

[3.21.1] That the Court is not have reason to specify the provisions of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) in which the phrase "Candidates list

Fixed" as unconstitutional provisions, but on the other hand in terms

occurrence of cases as experienced by the PPDI provisions section a quo

cannot be the basis for completing it in order to protect

the constitutional rights of the applicant;

[3.21.2] That suspending, or let alone vacate the seat of PPDI in membership of the DPRD South Central Timorese Regency has been obtained

through the mechanism lawful election as a means of democracy is

is a problem constitutional, the subject of human rights of citizens

the state to elect his deputy as his participation in life

75

the democratic statehood and the rights of citizens whose party has obtained

the seat through a valid general election to occupy the office

representative. Such may not occur for reason only because not

a provision in the laws deemed not

sufficient or obscure;

[3.22] It is balanced that the meaning contained in Section 28D verse (1)

Constitution of 1945, as contained in the Court of Justice Number 14-17/PUU-

V/2007 dated December 11, 2007 that in any state that states

itself as a democratic legal country there are three important principles that

attached to it, namely supremacy of law, equality before the law, and due

process of law which applies as a fundamental principle for citizen relations

with state and fellow citizens. The applicant in this case has been

declared legally based on the ruling court ruling

the law fixed (due process of law) was then submitted as a replacement candidate

DPRD of South Central Timor Regency by legitimate political party administrators

by law, and have also covered the replacement process in accordance with

the laws. Therefore, by guideline to

the principle of legal supremacy and due process of law as described

it, if the phrase "Fixed Candidate List" as specified Section 218 of the paragraph

(3) Act 10/2008 It remains enforced to the applicant to inflict

uncertainty of the law to citizens who have qualified to be

The candidate for the replacement of the Central Timorese Council of Central Timorese. Already

semestinyalah according to the Court of ruling that has been dropped by Judge

through the judiciary and has a fixed legal force (inkracht van gewijsde, res

judicata), cannot be interrupted again, anyone no one can

change it, and the verdict must be executed even though it is cruel and not

fun. Thus, for the sake of the law, the ruling a quo

must be implemented.

[3.23] A draw that is based on the description in consideration-

legal considerations above, the Court views that issue

constitutionality as such above must be resolved

constitutionally. To that of the Court as a constitutional interpreter should interpret

76

article a quo, so that it can be the basis of a constitutional settlement

in the case of a quo;

[3.24] It is possible that despite the Competent Petitioners,

but the existence of a quo cannot be as well as merta to be contradictory

with the 1945 Constitution and has no binding legal force, because if

so will result in legal uncertainty in the nominating process

DPR members and A DPRD. The Court in this case agrees with the expert

applicant Samuel Frederik Lena, that the substance of Article 218 of the paragraph (3) of Act 10/2008 is intended to guarantee a fair legal certainty. That is, the a quo

is constitutional only if certain terms are met, that is, as long as

is fair as referred to in Article 22E of the paragraph (1) of the Constitution of 1945, during the

guarantee of legal certainty as referred to in Article 28D of paragraph (1) and

during the passage of the sovereignty of the people as referred to in Article

1 paragraph (2) of the 1945 Constitution. In contrast, the a quo becomes unconstitutional if in

certain conditions pose injustice and or do not guarantee certainty

fair laws and ignores of the sovereignty of the people, all in context

The elected representatives of the people through the elections. Accordingly, according to the Court of Justice

218 paragraph (3) of Law 10/2008 during the phrase "Permanent Candidates List" must be stated

conditional unconstitutional (conditionally unconstitutional), which is to the extent

the understanding is not includes a replacement candidate submitted by a political party, which

has a seat in the House, the provincial DPRD, the DPRD district/city in the event

there are more candidates listed in the Permanent Candidates List (DCT);

[3.25] Weighing that with the fact that the a quo goes against

The Basic Law of the Republic of Indonesia Year 1945 on conditional

does not mean the political party can arbitrarily stop

its members who have been listed in the Candidates List Remain, so it happens

vacancies in the Candidate List remain, such as doing a replacement with

filing the names of new candidates previously not listed in the

List of Fixed Candidates.

77

4. KONKLUSI

Based on the entire description and legal fact above, the Court

concludes:

[4.1] The court is authorized to examine, prosecute, and discontinue the case

a quo;

[4.2] The applicant has a position law (legal standing) to submit

pleas in case a quo;

[4.3] Dalil-dalil applicant reason according to law for

in part;

Based on the Constitution of the Republic of State Indonesia Year

1945, Article 56 verse (2) and paragraph (3), Article 57 of the paragraph (1) and paragraph (3) Invite-

Invite Number 24 Year 2003 On Constitutional Court (sheet Of State

Republic Of Indonesia In 2003 Number 98, Additional Gazette Republic Of State

Indonesia Number 4316);

5. AMAR RU