Baca berita dengan sedikit iklan, klik di sini
TEMPO.CO, Jakarta -
Baca berita dengan sedikit iklan, klik di sini
Dear Readers,
Baca berita dengan sedikit iklan, klik di sini
Baca berita dengan sedikit iklan, klik di sini
People usually correct their mistakes of the past by changing their conduct or showing a desire to do better in the future. Therefore, if we watch the hearing into the dispute over the presidential election, the constitutional justices appeared to be examining the alleged fraud in the 2024 election to correct its previous error and improve the poor image of this highest legal institution.
Last year, the Constitutional Court passed a ruling outside its competence: granting a challenge to the minimum age for presidential and vice-presidential candidates in the General Election Law. As a result, Gibran Rakabuming Raka, who was not yet old enough, was able to run in the election. The problem is that this ruling was passed by constitutional justices led by Anwar Usman, President Jokowi’s brother-in-law and Gibran’s uncle.
The mockery of ‘Family Court,’ taken from the title of an editorial in this magazine, became popular. The image of the Constitutional Court, already tarnished due to its Chief Justice being implicated in corruption, plummeted further with that ruling. Therefore, when former Chief Justice Anwar Usman, who had been fired by the Constitutional Court’s Ethics Council, was replaced by Suhartoyo, it seemed logical to assume that the Court would improve in its rulings.
Hence, many were optimistic that Suhartoyo would bring a sense of justice to the presidential election dispute. But that hope turned out to be overly optimistic. The court ruling said that there was insufficient evidence for the claims of electoral fraud. Only three Court justices, out of eight, agreed that there was sufficient evidence. This ratio of 5:3 would have been even if Suhartoyo had sided with those offering a dissenting opinion. But Suhartoyo sided with the justices who produced conservative considerations of legal norms.
With that decision, the drama of the Election came to an end. We will have a new president and vice-president after October 2024: Prabowo Subianto and Gibran Rakabuming Raka. Now, it remains to be seen whether the parties that did not support Prabowo will become the opposition in the House of Representatives. If they waver and succumb to coalition persuasion, there will be no balancing force in the House.
This edition discusses what happened behind the Constitutional Court’s ruling. What actually were the considerations? Was there indeed a discussion about disqualifying Gibran from Prabowo’s victory?
Happy reading,
Bagja Hidayat
Deputy Chief Editor
Behind the Verdict of The Constitutional Court’s
The Constitutional Court rejected lawsuits disputing the results of the 2024 presidential election. The option of disqualifying Gibran was discussed in a meeting of the judge.
Anies Baswedan and Ganjar Pranowo’s Next Move
Ganjar Pranowo will be taking up environmental issues after the Constitutional Court’s verdict. Anies is considering joining the Prabowo-Gibran camp.
The Fate of the Right of Inquiry
The right of inquiry into election fraud in the DPR effectively failed following announcement of the Constitutional Court’s decision. Only the PKS remains consistent.
Economy
How Restrictive Import Regulations Heat Wheat Flour Industry
Import restrictions make it difficult for flour producers to obtain raw ingredients. Regulatory bans and restrictions threaten many industries.
Interview
Retno Marsudi: There’no Intention of establishing diplomatic relation with Israel
Foreign Affairs Minister Retno Marsudi explains the Gaza war and the Iran-Israel conflict with its impact on Indonesia’s economy.
Read complete report at Tempo Magazine:
