Yusril called the KPU surrounded by a circle of not wanting to execute the PTUN decision regarding OSO

JAKARTA, KOMPAS.com – Oesman Sapta Odang's lawyer (OSO), Yusril Ihza Mahendra, said that the General Election Commission (KPU) had failed in its duty because it did not want to execute the decision of the Administrative Court of the state regarding the appointment of the OSO as a member of the Council of Regional Representatives (DPO).

According to Yusril, the KPU feared losing face during the execution of the administrative court's judgment.

The verdict itself contained the order of the judges of the administrative court at the KPU to annul their decree (SK) declaring that OSO did not meet the requirements (TMS) as candidates for the DPD elections of 2019.

In his ruling, the judge also ordered the KPU to replace the OSO decree, stating that the Hanura party's general chairman was eligible to be a member of the DPO.

"The KPU has trouble refusing to execute the decision of the PTUN for fear of losing face.Although there is no personal interest in this country, the KPU has acquitted itself of its obligations to the state in a neutral and objective way, "said Yusril after his confirmation Wednesday (28/11/2018).

Read also: KPU Beware of decisions on the appointment of a Bureau member to the DPD House of Representatives

Yusril felt that as an organizer of elections, the KPU could not clearly understand the law. The KPU is even called dirty minded because of political interests.

He stated that the KPU should be able to immediately apply the verdict of the court, rather than staying behind the decision of the Constitutional Court (MK) No. 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 concerning the conditions of appointment of members of DPD.

According to Yusril, the decision of the Constitutional Court was normative. The KPU implemented the decision of the Constitutional Court by turning PKPU number 14 in 2018 into PKPU number 26 of 2018, adding that the conditions for candidates for DPO membership must be resigned from the leadership of the political party.

However, the decision of the Constitutional Court did not apply retroactively. This was also confirmed by the Supreme Court (MA) in decision No. 65 P / HUM / 2018.

It was the decision of the Supreme Court that later became the basis upon which PTUN decided to grant the lawsuit brought by OSO. PTUN's decision, continued Yusril, is imperative and must be executed by the KPU.

Also read: OSO is suggested to focus on Hanura rather than becoming a DPD candidate.

"The nature of the decisions of the Constitutional Court and the Supreme Court is normative because it tests the validity of a standard." The PTUN decision is imperative, namely a KPU order to put it into effect. work, "said Yusril.

Yusril added that there was no conflict between the decisions of the Constitutional Court, the Supreme Court and the Administrative Court.

In the 2024 election, Yusril said, the KPU could adopt the ruling of the Constitutional Court that members of political parties should not be candidates for the DPO membership. Indeed, the decision of the Constitutional Court is prospective in the future and not retroactive.

"Thus, the candidates for the positions of members of the DPO who are no more administrators of political parties will be able to be recruited only from the elections of 2024. The legal security is clear with the decision of the supreme court which cancels the decision retroactive decision of the Constitutional Court set out in PKPU 26/2018, "said Yusril.

Previously, the KPU had wiped out the OSO as a candidate for the DPO as it had not submitted a letter of resignation from a political party. OSO are still considered as members of political parties.

According to the MP's decision, members of the DPO are not allowed to hold competing positions as members of political parties.

The rules concerning the prohibition of members of the DPO to hold several posts are set out in the decision of the Constitutional Court No. 30 / PUU-XVI / 2018 which was read on Monday (23/07/2018). The decision of the Constitutional Court took effect from the first reading.

On the basis of the KPU's decision, the OSO lodged a complaint with the Supreme Court (MA) and the State Administrative Court (PTUN).

The Supreme Court granted the OSO judicial review of PKPU number 26 of 2018, which contained the conditions for appointing members of the DPO.

Although the judges of the administrative court also allowed the action of the Hanura party chairman and annulled the decree KPU (SK), which stipulated that OSO did not fulfill the requirements (TMS) as a candidate for the post member of the DPO. The judge also ordered the KPU to revoke the decree.