The Constitutional Court began on Friday to hear a lawsuit challenging the presidential election result that has granted victory to President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo.

Bambang Widjojanto, the chief lawyer of the challenger duo of Prabowo Subianto and Sandiaga Uno, the plaintiff in the case, said Prabowo demanded that the incumbent’s ticket be disqualified for “systematic, structured and massive fraud” during the campaign period and election process.

The camp also demanded revoting in 12 provinces, including Central Java, East Java and Jakarta, the key provinces that the incumbent won in the April 17 election.

In the lawsuit, which largely relies on press reports, Prabowo accuses the General Elections Commission (KPU) of irregularities in the election process resulting in Jokowi’s victory.

“We believe there was electoral fraud that caused stolen votes, which number between 16 million and 30 million, and this has really affected [the number of votes for] Prabowo,” Bambang said.

According to the plaintiff, based on the C1 vote tally forms the Prabowo camp has gathered, Prabowo secured 52 percent of the vote.

The official election result announced by the KPU show that the Jokowi-Ma’ruf pair secured 85 million votes (55.5 percent), while Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno garnered 68 million votes (44.5 percent).

Bambang said the official election result had been influenced by an incorrect final voter list (DPT) and special voter list (DPK).

In their petition, the plaintiffs claim Jokowi-Ma’ruf should have only got around 63 million votes and accuse the KPU of inflating Jokowi-Ma’ruf’s tally by the difference of around 22 million votes.

“The KPU previously declared that there were 17.5 million problematic voters on the DPT, but they could not explain this to us. On the polling day, April 17, it instead added 5.7 million voters to the DPK […]. The number of problematic DPT and DPK [entries] is around 22 million. This is related to the stolen votes,” he said.

After hearing the lawyer team’s demand, KPU commissioner Hasyim Asy’ari said the allegations against the KPU were unreasonable and Prabowo’s arguments were confusing.

“[The lawyer team] accused the KPU of ‘structured, systematic and massive’ fraud, and I am honestly confused. If there had been fraud, then why did they not report this to the Elections Supervisory Agency [Bawaslu]? Bawaslu watches every tiny bit of the electoral process,” Hasyim said.

He added that the Prabowo team also had not objected to the multistage ballot-counting process, from the polling stations to the national level.

“As far as we know, from 34 provinces, there may be no objection to the ballot count. If they had proof, from anywhere between the polling stations and the provincial level, it would certainly have been taken to the national level,” he said.

The Prabowo-Sandiaga camp also accused the Jokowi-Ma’ruf campaign of misusing public funds and the state apparatus to support the incumbent’s reelection campaign. They also pointed to the alleged bias of the police and military for the incumbent.

Ma’ruf’s status as a supervisor in two subsidiaries of state-owned banks was also questioned.

Jokowi-Ma’ruf chief lawyer Yusril Ihza Mahendra said the plaintiff had always claimed that there were 17.5 million problematic votes but could not explain where that number came from.

He further said the plaintiff could not simply accuse the incumbent of committing fraud by asking people, including officials, to do something.

“If Jokowi said, ‘come with white shirts’, how do you prove that they came with white shirts and voted for him?” he said.

Jokowi-Ma’ruf campaign team vice chairman Arsul Sani said there was almost no connection between Prabowo’s quantitative and qualitative arguments leveled at the KPU and Jokowi.

“The causalities are unclear. [Prabowo-Sandiaga’s] version of Jokowi’s votes is [...] very odd and nonsensical,” Arsul said.

Constitutional law scholar Feri Amsari said Prabowo’s qualitative and quantitative arguments were indeed incoherent with one another in the context of “structured, systematic and massive” election violations. Feri said the Prabowo team should have a strong piece of evidence to support the claim that the KPU had committed fraud.

“If they put this into the context of the ‘structured, systematical and massive’ election violations, then they should prove the KPU’s involvement,” he said.

Feri added that, looking at the arguments put forward, the chance of Prabowo winning the dispute was slim, as proving “structured, systematic and massive” election fraud was not an easy task.

“If they want to win, they should have proof of the KPU’s involvement no matter what,” Feri said.

Outside the court building, hundreds of supporters of Prabowo, including from the Islam Defenders Front (FPI), assembled around Monas Square.

They defied a police ban imposed to allow the court hearing to proceed without undue pressure, and also a public appeal from Prabowo himself, who said there was no need to protest. Prabowo also stated that he would accept the court’s decision, come what may. The entire hearing was broadcast live on TV, so the public could follow it closely.

But the protesters, who began to arrive as early as 8 a.m., were blocked from reaching the court building on Jl. Medan Merdeka Barat. Police, supported by personnel from the Marine Corps, put up barbed wire and barricades and closed the road to all traffic.

“We’re not on anyone’s side,” said FPI spokesman Abdullah Hehamaua. “We’re here to demand justice, the truth and professionalism from the court.” (dmy)

Popular

Israel army says 'encourages' eastern Rafah residents to leave

Indonesia oldest shoemaker Bata closes its only factory

More than meets the eye in photo of orangutan ‘offering help’ to man