TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search results
Popular Reads
Top Results
No results found. Please check your search term and try again
Can't find what you're looking for?
View all search resultsMK believed able to annul the House's decision on Pilkada, law expert says
Constitutional law expert and Center for Electoral Reform (CETRO) senior researcher Refly Harun said on Friday that he believed the Constitutional Court (MK) would annul the decision of the House of Representatives' lawmakers to replace the direct election of regional heads with indirect elections
Change text size
Gift Premium Articles
to Anyone
Share the best of The Jakarta Post with friends, family, or colleagues. As a subscriber, you can gift 3 to 5 articles each month that anyone can read—no subscription needed!
C
onstitutional law expert and Center for Electoral Reform (CETRO) senior researcher Refly Harun said on Friday that he believed the Constitutional Court (MK) would annul the decision of the House of Representatives' lawmakers to replace the direct election of regional heads with indirect elections. Therefore, he advised those disappointed with the decision to go to the Court to file a lawsuit against it.
'I believe that the possibility that the Court will [decide in favor of the plaintiffs in such a] lawsuit is big,' he said, as quoted by kompas.com.
At dawn on Friday, lawmakers at the House were able to decide at a plenary meeting that direct elections for regional heads would be replaced with indirect elections because votes from the camp supporting direct elections, which consisted of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the National Awakening Party (PKB) and the Hanura Party, totaled only 135, which were far fewer than the 226 votes cast by the camp supporting indirect elections, which consisted of the Golkar Party, the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), the National Mandate Party (PAN), the United Development Party (PPP) and the Gerindra Party.
However, the Democratic Party, which previously supported direct elections, decided to walk out because the House refused to adopt the 10 points it proposed during the meeting.
Refly said that according to the 1945 Constitution (UUD 1945), people had the right to vote and to be counted. Therefore, he believed that the MK would decide the lawsuit in favor of direct elections because the House's decision had clearly revoked the people's constitutional rights. (alz)
