Mutual Appreciation at End of Hearing

KOMPAS/HERU SRI KUMORO

Witnesses and experts from the National Campaign Team of Joko Widodo-Ma\'ruf Amin return to their seats after taking their oath before testifying at a hearing of the election dispute at the Constitutional Court, Jakarta, Friday (21/6/2019).

The opposing parties in the presidential election legal case expressed appreciation for each other at the end of the hearing on Friday (21/6/2019). The Constitutional Court (MK) is expected to issue a ruling in the next week.

JAKARTA, KOMPAS — With the session for the litigating parties to present their witnesses having ended on Friday (21/6) night, the hearings in the case on the presidential election dispute are now over. The nine MK justices will hold an assembly from June 24-27 and issue a ruling on June 28.

The hearing for the involved parties factual and expert witnesses on Friday night ended with mutual appreciation between members of the plaintiff’s and the defendant’s legal teams, many of whom are old colleagues with long experience of working together as academics or lawyers.

Among them were Gadjah Mada University (UGM) alumni Denny Indrayana, Luthfi Yazid, Heru Widodo and Edward OS Hiariej. Denny and Luthfi served in the Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno legal team, while Heru and Edward were expert witnesses presented by the Joko Widodo-Ma’ruf Amin camp. Meanwhile, Prabowo-Sandiaga lawyer Bambang Widjojanto, Jokowi-Amin lawyer Luhut Pangaribuan and Trimedya Panjaitan from the Jokowi-Amin national campaign team were former staff members of the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI).

At the end of the hearing on Friday, the involved parties also expressed their hope that the MK justices could reach a just ruling in the election case. The ruling will be final and binding.

Before ending the session on Friday night, MK chief justice Anwar Usman said the MK would hold a justice assembly (RPH) afterwards.

“We will continue our debate [in the RPH]. We will use all the evidence and arguments presented by the plaintiff, the defendant and relevant parties to seek truth and justice,” he said.

In the RPH, the justices formulate their conviction based on evidence and facts presented during the hearings.

MK’s authority

The Jokowi-Amin camp presented two fact witnesses and two expert witnesses in the hearing on Friday. The factual witnesses were the Jokowi-Amin national campaign team’s training coordinator Anas Nashikin and Candra Irawan from the campaign team’s directorate of witnesses. Expert witnesses presented in the hearing were Eddy OS Hiariej and Heru Widodo.

Eddy said the MK’s authority was limited to resolving disputes related to vote margin. The MK has no authority in resolving other election disputes, which are under the authority of the Elections Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu).

“In their petition, the plaintiff mixed the vote margin dispute with the election process dispute,” Eddy said.

The plaintiff claimed there had been structured, systematic and massive fraud and urged the MK justices to disqualify the Jokowi-Amin pair.

KOMPAS/HERU SRI KUMORO

Chandra Irawan, a witness of the National Campaign Team (TKN) of the Joko Widodo-Ma\'ruf Amin presidential and vice-presidential candidate pair, testifies at a hearing on the election dispute at the Constitutional Court, Jakarta, Friday (21/6/2019). At the hearing the legal team of the TKN presented two witnesses and two experts.

Eddy said he disagreed with the plaintiff’s argument that cited previous MK rulings on regional elections, where claims of widespread fraud were made. Eddy said these rulings were made between 2008 and 2014, before there were clear regulations on election dispute resolution. In 2015, Indonesia established a regulation on election disputes.

To prove widespread fraud, Eddy said, there should be evidence of a well-organized crime.

Meanwhile, Heru Widodo said disqualifications could not be done after voting was done and the winner was declared. The precedents were regional election disputes resolved after 2015, where requests for disqualification were rejected.

The plaintiff’s lawyer Bambang Widjojanto said preparing proper arguments in the hearing was difficult, considering the tight schedule and that only one day was given to prepare the arguments. “In a quick hearing process of only 14 days, is it possible to resolve a case of systematic, structured and massive fraud, which is an extraordinary crime?” he asked.

KOMPAS/HERU SRI KUMORO

The situation when Chandra Irawan, a witness of the National Campaign Team (TKN) of the Joko Widodo-Ma\'ruf Amin presidential and vice-presidential candidate pair, testifies at the hearing of the election dispute at the Constitutional Court, Jakarta, Friday (21/6/2019). At the hearing the legal team of the TKN presented two witnesses and two experts.

Edyd said the tight schedule should not be an excuse. All court cases must be based on evidence.

He said substantive and procedural justice could go hand-in-hand. “When we talk about substantive justice, we cannot set aside procedural justice. In order to seek material truth, we cannot neglect formal truth and procedures,” he said.

Transparency

Indonesian Legal Roundtable deputy director Erwin Natosmal said the MK had proven itself as a modern justice body throughout the hearings. The public enjoys full access to the hearings. Next, all involved parties must respect the MK’s final and binding ruling, whatever it may be. (REK/IGA)