T

he Constitutional Court started hearing on Wednesday seven judicial review petitions challenging two government regulations in lieu of law (Perppu) issued by former president Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, which would bring back a direct-election mechanism for local leaders.

The court started the session despite the House of Representatives'€™ plan to deliberate the Perppu in January next year.

The seven petitions were filed by several individuals, including an election watchdog and legal observers, a former Jakarta Elections Supervisory Committee (Panwaslu) chairman and two former members of the House as well as a group calling itself the Forum of Legal and Constitutional Review (FKHK).

Though most of them argued that the Perppu had never met the primary requirement of being issued under '€œemergency conditions'€, the plaintiffs told the court during the first hearing on Wednesday that they had different demands regarding the election mechanism.

Some plaintiffs demanded that the court scrap the Perppu as they wanted to ensure the country would have the direct local-election mechanism, while some wanted to go back to the 2014 Local Elections (Pilkada) Law, which has been annulled as Yudhoyono issued the Perppu. The 2014 law carries a stipulation on the representative-based local-elections mechanism.

Plaintiff Didi Supriyanto, a former Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) lawmaker who is now an executive of the National Mandate Party (PAN), said the Perppu was unconstitutional because the issuance process did not meet the required '€œprompt and immediate'€ conditions and, therefore, the decision to issue the regulation by Yudhoyono could potentially compromise the country'€™s legal system.

'€œThe Perppu shows the inconsistency on the part of the former president [Yudhoyono],'€ Didi told the panel on Wednesday. '€œWe believe that he [Yudhoyono] made the move simply because he had differences with the House.'€

Yudhoyono, he said, had resorted to an '€œautocratic'€ move by cancelling the law he previously approved.

'€œIt can set a bad precedent and will undermine the legislative authority of the House in making the laws,'€ he said.

Heriyanto, a plaintiff who, along with former Panwaslu commissioner Ramdansyah, supported the direct mechanism, told the court to annul the Perppu and suspend the 2014 law, and to bring back the 2008 Local Administration Law that set the direct mechanism.

'€œ[We demand the court] bring back the 2008 law, in the sense that we want to go back to direct local elections,'€ he said.

Justice Maria Farida reminded all plaintiffs that should the court annul the Perppu, it could create a legal vacuum.

'€œShould the Perppu be annulled, there will be legal consequences.'€

Justice Aswanto also raised similar concerns.

'€œ[And] if the Perppu is rejected by the House, the 2014 law will not immediately take effect. There should be another process.'€