Previous 4 / 160 Next

6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. E. Taufik Basari Ikhsan Abdullah Ahmad Rofiq Afriansyah Ferry Noer Erlinda Arsul Sani Luhut Pangaribuan Christina Aryani Juri Ardiantoro Hanif Dhakiri Herry Lontung Siregar Raja Juli Antoni Verry Surya Hendrawan Arteria Dahlan Trimedya Panjaitan Teguh Samudera Pasang Haro Rajagukguk Destinal Armunanto Muhammad Aris Christophorus Taufik Muslim Jaya Butar-Butar Johnny G. Plate Dini Shanti Purwono Fahri Bachmid Nelson Simanjuntak Dewi Kamaratih M. Iqbal Sumarlan Nurmala Tangguh Setiawan Sirait Eri Hertiawan M. Rullyandi Gugum Ridho Putra Ignatius Andy Sirra Prayuna Badan Pengawas Pemilu: 1. Abhan 2. Ratna Dewi Pettalolo 3. Mochammad Afifuddin 4. Rahmat Bagja 5. Fritz Edward Siregar 6. Agung Indra Atmaja 7. Witra Evelin Maduma Sinaga 8. Geano Giovan Naldi 9. Mahrus Ali 10. Bella Nathania iii

Select target paragraph3

● ● ●

Prabowo Subianto & Sandiaga Salahudin Uno v. General Election Commission

Judgment

Question Presented: Did the General Election Commission (KPU) violate the General Elections Code while conducting the vote count for the 2019 presidential election?

Alleged Acts: The KPU is alleged with systematically, structurally, and massively rigging the election and inflating the incumbent’s tally-which stood at 85 million votes against Prabowo Subianto’s 68 million votes – by around 22 million votes.

Procedural history: Prabowo Subianto and Sandiaga Uno filed a complaint to the Constitutional Court.

Summary: In the lawsuit, Prabowo-Sandiaga not only questioned the KPU’s election result announcement, but also alleged that the official result had been rigged by a dubious final voter list, which included 17.5 million so-called problematic voters, as well as an additional 5.7 million voters on the special voter list. Prabowo-Sandiaga presented a total of 14 witnesses and experts to strengthen the lawsuit. These witnesses gave various testimonies, ranging from millions of alleged invalid ID card numbers to suspected vote-stamping attempts by election workers.

Conclusion: After the Constitutional Court completed its investigation of all witness testimonies, which were broadcasted live on television and online, the Constitutional Court announced its final and binding verdict that Prabowo-Sandiaga’s accusations had been legally incorrect, and thus, all the judges rejected the plea/petition.

Legal Issue(s)

Disputing Results

Applicable Law(s): Law No. 8/2011 on Constitutional Court; General Election Code No. 7/2017 art. 474; Law No. 48/2009 on Judiciary Authority art. 29 para (1) letter e.

Region: Asia-Pacific

Country: Indonesia

Language of Decision

Indonesian

Court: Constitutional Court

Election Type: Presidential

Date of decision: Jun 27, 2019

Geolocation

Latitude: -6.164852776763561

Longitude: 106.83000063192988

: Geolocation

Primary Documents

5390_Risalah-pdf_Putusan 1.Pilpres.2019 27.06.19.pdf
Sundanese
Download View

Election Judgments - IFES

Select target paragraph3

Prabowo Subianto & Sandiaga Salahudin Uno v. General Election Commission

Primary Documents

Notifications