(021) - 296 - 082 - 04 Contact@SidinConstitution.co.id

Part 4: Presidential Threshold Removal – “A Part of the Story of “Hand of God”?

Presidential Threshold Removal, (Part 4)
“A Part of the Story of “Hand of God”?
by A. Irmanputra Sidin PhD in Constitutional Law/ Constitutional Lawyer

If you just read this part, I suggest you to read previous part (part 3), so it would build complete comprehension.

To continue the story in part 3, The next question is, does it only because of legal reasoning that built by petitioners, succeed to drive majority constitutional justices to abolish Presidential Threshold? As I explained previously, The Courts often depend on series of events that happened which has classified high controversial events. Even if the constitutional justices have owned an indisputable reasoning in their mind, sometimes they would choose “to be all ears” or judicial restraint.

Actually, why Presidential Threshold finally abolished? In subconscious and conscious mind of the court, the court could not escape all the series of events had happened previously in the relation between court’s verdict and political interplay of “Big Politics”. Those would predisposed the court”s mindset especially with their relationship with regime Prabowo Subianto-Gibran Rakabuming Raka.

Source: Agung Rajasa/ANTARA

The Court still could not “move on” from verdict which was read on Monday, October 16, 2023, the Case No 90/PUU-XXI/2023 (Case 90) when the Court grants the Petitioner’s petition in part. The Court declares Article 169 letter q of Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections that reads ‘at least 40 (forty) years of age’ in violation of the 1945 Constitution and not legally binding if not interpreted as ‘at least 40 (forty) years of age or has occupied/is occupying an office elected through a general election, including the election of heads of regions,”. In this verdict, three constitutional justices shared their dissents while two provided their concurring opinions. The three dissents came from Justices Saldi Isra, Arief Hidayat, and Wahiduddin Adams. Their argument asserted, the Court should have rejected the petition.

Whatever it is, this verdict (Case 90) had dismantle political map that drove Gibran Rakabuming Raka, the son of President Jokowi may ran as a Vice Presidential candidate. Of Course, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) as the political party of President Jokowi could not accepted Gibran Rakabuming Raka as a vice President candidate. The most plausible reasoning is because of political calculation, not because Gibran still too young or have not enough experiences. A political calculation, If all PDIP’s man in a pair of Presidential candidate, it would predicted, this pair could not beat Prabowo Subianto or Anies Baswedan who would be opponents, moreover, if Prabowo Subianto choose his new pair with Anies Baswedan.

So the best choice for President Jokowi and also Prabowo Subianto if they want to win this election, they should be align each other, and to propose Gibran Rakabuming Raka as a running mate for Vice President Prabowo Subianto. If The Court rejected this petition (Case 90), President Jokowi could not be align with Prabowo Subianto and perhaps would be still intimate relationships with his party at that time, PDI Perjuangan. President Jokowi would stand up as supporter for his party and the story of Prabowo Subianto was not necessarily be elected as President 2024.

Immediately, after Case 90, this controversial decision caused Chief Justice Anwar Usman and other constitutional justices dragged to the ethics council. But all the camera and spotlight was on Anwar Usman. Not only due as an uncle of Gibran Rakabuming Raka, also because in the dissent of verdict, some of Constitutional Justices was shouting clearly as a part of of the decision, that Anwar Usman acted unprofessional and unethical conduct. This is the first time I read the dissent with a smile. All this time, all dissent limited argue is only about different legal reasoning, to the majority of The Constitutional Justices. But, It’s okay, those dissent would be a new story to cook a verdict and has given wisdom that in the future, all the Constitutional Justices will be more watchful and discreet each others.

Anwar Usman and other constitutional justices examined by the Ethics Council of the Constitutional Court (MKMK). Ethics Council found him guilty of a “serious ethical violation” when he used his position participated in handing down verdict Case 90 and deemed he had clear a path for his nephew to run for vice president. Anwar Usman dismissed as a Chief Justice (Tuesday, November 7, 2023).

Source: M. Risyal Hidayat/ANTARA

Anwar Usman filed an appeal against civil service arbitration court or state administrative court (PTUN) on his dismissal from the court’s chairman. I know why he did it, because he knew very well that judicial review of laws in the Constitutional Court is public domain, and are not private or individual cases. So what’s the problem when he participated in making verdict, because all the verdict classified “erga omnes”, obligations and rights towards all and many jurisprudences about it.

After that, the political turbulence to be continuing because the General Election would coming soon on February 14, 2024.. And the General Election Commission announced that Presidential candidate Prabowo Subianto and Gibran Rakabuming Raka won the presidential election with 96,2 Million votes (58,6%) in a landslide victory (March 20, 2024).

So what can we read the result of presidential election and relation of concerns that have raised about Case 90 would ruin democracy and constitution? And the next question is, Does political interplay between President Jokowi and Defense Minister Prabowo Subianto at that time, which aligned each other to create a pair of presidential candidate for 2024 election, classified as violation of the constitution? I will answer it in the next part.

To be continued,
Thank you..
Jakarta, January 15, 2025
#irmanputrasidin #presidentialthreshold

 

0
Would love your thoughts, please comment.x
()
x