PKB appreciates Constitution Court judgment on Parliamentary Threshold

8
PKB Central Leadership Council Deputy General Chairman Jazilul Fawaid.

The National Awakening Party (Partai Kebangkitan Bangsa – “PKB”) has commended the Constitution Court for having partially granted their petition to perform a material discussion concerning Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections, in relation to the Indonesia Change Movement (Gerakan Perubahan Indonesia – “Garuda”) Party.

The Constitution Court Judgement decrees that any political party that has passed verification tests in 2019 and satisfies Parliamentary Threshold (“PT”) requirement in the 2019 Election still needs to have administrative verification performed, but there is no need for them to undergo factual verification. Also, political parties that did not pass verification or PT requirement, that are only represented at Provincial, Regency, or Municipal-level Regional House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah “DPRD”), and that are not represented in such levels of DPRD, must undergo both administrative and factual re-verification. In other words, they must satisfy the same requirements as new political parties.

PKB Central Leadership Council (Dewan Pimpinan Pusat – “DPP”) Deputy General Chairman Jazilul Fawaid (“Gus Jazil”) accepts this Supreme Court Judgment as a wise one. After all, it will take a lot of money and effort for political parties that have passed the parliamentary threshold in the 2019 Elections. “Why waste the State’s money on things such as repeating factual verifications? After spending that budget, it has been proven that all parties that pass PT requirements will definitely pass verification requirements. Never, none of them ever failed verification. That’s based on experience. I think that’s enough,” he said on Wednesday (05/05/2021).

Gus Jazil went on to say that “I even believe that administrative verification should comprise simply reporting the current management of the Party to the Election Commission (Komisi Pemilihan Umum – “KPU”). Performing repeated factual verification is useless make-work. This is why the Constitution Court is wise in deciding that parties that passed PT requirement do not need to perform factual re-verification, just administrative re-verification,” he said. “On the other hand, we hope that Electoral Organizers simplify the administrative re-verification process. Let’s not make it more complicated. What matters is that the relevant parties report on their current management; that’s enough. That’s light work, and the budget expenditure is much less. That’s efficient.”

Meanwhile, Garuda Party objects to the above Constitution Court Judgement concerning Material Testing of Article 173 of the Electoral Law. As long as a political party is verified, the result of the verification should endure and be valid for future Elections. Garuda Party General Secretary Abdullah Mansuri stated that their charges were initiated by the constitutional injustice after the previous amendment of the Electoral Laws by the Constitution Court, wherein political parties that passed Electoral verification requirements must repeat both administrative and factual verifications each time. “The principle is not just a matter of efficiency, but a matter of obtaining the same right to convenience, opportunities, and benefits – the right for justice in verification by the State through Electoral Organizers instead of a privilege,” he said on Tuesday (04/05/2021).

Abdullah believes that this convenience and special treatment hints on exceptional privilege towards some. To repeat: Along as political parties are verified, the result of this verification should remain and apply to subsequent Elections, unless the Party failed the electoral verification in the new Elections and cannot be listed as an Electoral Participant. “On the contrary, when verification results show that the party passed and can participate in the Election, they need not be verified in a subsequent Election. This is the form of legal certainty or legality of political party verification. Furthermore, it is also in line with the principal of legal fairness,” he said. (des)