MEMBER of Commission II DPR RI Guspardi Gaus said that the Constitutional Judge’s warning to the Commissioner of the General Election Commission (KPU) in the 2024 Legislative Election dispute hearing must be taken seriously as evaluation material. The KPU was asked to give priority to attending hearings at the Constitutional Court (MK) as part of its responsibility as election organizer.
“The KPU must also know which priority scale in the agenda it must follow. “We at the DPR just gave the KPU latitude during the RDP (hearing meeting) because there was a hearing with the MK, we postponed it for now,” said Guspardi when contacted.
According to him, the presence of the KPU at the 2024 legislative election dispute hearing is very important because it involves comparing data on vote disputes submitted by the applicant. He hopes that a similar incident will not happen once more
“We must respect this court for the interests of democracy, the interests of the parties involved in the legislative elections,” he explained.
Contacted separately, the Director of the Indonesian Democracy and Electoral Empowerment Partnership (DEEP) Neni Nur Hayati said the presence of the KPU at the trial must be able to answer various substances in dispute.
“Because this relates to data, lawsuit material that determines the fate of legislative candidates or parties who file a lawsuit,” said Neni.
Also read: Observer: There is a problem with the leadership of KPU commissioners
Neni added that the argument in the lawsuit related to the transfer of votes due to the lack of transparency in the recapitulation process carried out by the KPU. Based on Deep Indonesia’s research on the 2024 Election, the practice of transferring votes usually occurs from one legislative candidate to another within one party, then between political parties and vote inflation through unused ballot papers.
“And the number has increased compared to the 2019 election. Because the 2024 election is very barbaric. Sirekap, which should be a tool for transparency, is actually problematic,” said Neni.
“For this reason, if the KPU is not present, this is a reflection that the KPU is not serious regarding handling the problem. “This needs to be an evaluation and must not be repeated so that we can answer the substance of the PHPU trial problem at the Constitutional Court,” he continued
Previously, constitutional judge Arief Hidayat, who led panel 3 of the legislative election results dispute hearing, was angry when he found out that none of the disputing members of the Indonesian KPU and provincial KPU were present at the preliminary examination hearing of the PHPU case, Thursday (2/5) because they were attending a technical event preparing for the regional elections. . Arief assessed that the KPU was not serious in responding to election results disputes submitted by the parties. In fact, according to Arief, this lack of seriousness has been visible since the handling of the dispute over the results of the presidential election some time ago. (Z-10)
#KPUs #Seriousness #Attending #Legislative #Election #Dispute #Session #Evaluated
