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.
Three dissenting justices outnumbered in revote call
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!
Constitutional Court Chief Justice Suhartoyo (center, rear) sits on a five- member panel with fellow justices (from left) Enny Nurbaningsih, Saldi Isra, Arief Hidayat and Daniel Yusmic Pancastaki Foekh as he presides over a hearing on Arpil 2, 2024, in the
election dispute filed by the Ganjar Pranowo-Mahfud MD presidential pair. (Antara/Akbar Nugroho Gumay)
W
hile the Constitutional Court ultimately ruled to confirm Prabowo Subianto as the nation’s eighth president, three justices filed dissenting opinions that called for a partial revote in response to alleged unethical conduct of outgoing President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo in the election.
In two separate 5-to-3 rulings on Monday, the court rejected all claims by losing candidates Anies Baswedan and Ganjar Pranowo that the victory of Prabowo and his running mate Gibran Rakabuming Raka depended on fraud and state partisanship of Gibran’s father Jokowi. The court ruled against their demands for a nationwide revote without Prabowo and Gibran on the ballots.
But there were three justices, namely Saldi Isra, Arief Hidayat and Enny Nurbaningsih, who did argue for a revote in both petitions, although only in provinces where state meddling and social aid disbursement were particularly key in swaying the vote returns in favor of the Prabowo-Gibran pair.
In his dissenting opinion, Saldi agreed with the petitioners that the disbursement of social aid by Jokowi during the campaign season constituted an “electoral incentive” for Prabowo and Gibran, who ran on a campaign of continuing the outgoing leader’s policies.
“The use of the state budget to [help secure a] win for one of the candidate pairs could be a legal loophole and could be imitated in the future, particularly in the upcoming regional elections," Saldi said.
“To safeguard the integrity of the [February] election, the Constitutional Court should have ordered a revote in several regions,” he added.
Read also: BREAKING: Court rejects first of two petitions seeking to overturn Prabowo's victory
