Nivell Rayda, Jakarta – The Indonesian Constitutional Court on Thursday (Jun 15) rejected a lawsuit that seeks to change the way the country runs its parliamentary election, contrary to a recent rumour spread by a former deputy justice minister that claimed otherwise.
Indonesia currently adopts the so-called "open-list proportional representation" system for its parliamentary election, allowing Indonesians to directly vote for a particular candidate.
It was adopted in 2009, replacing the highly critcised "closed proportional system" where voters can only vote for a political party at the polls.
In November last year, six plaintiffs including a politician from the ruling Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), questioned the constitutionality of the current system and motioned for the Constitutional Court to reinstate the old system.
The plaintiffs argued that the current system has turned the parliamentary election into a popularity contest which they say could jeopardise the country's unity. The open-list proportional representation system, the plaintiffs argued, makes the election susceptible to vote-buying and costs to balloon.
The Constitutional Court however dismissed these arguments on Thursday, saying that these issues and threats exist regardless of which election system Indonesia adopts.
"(The court) rejects the plaintiffs motion in its entirety," Constitutional Court chief Anwar Usman said in the ruling.
One of the eight judges present at the hearing, Justice Arief Hidayat, however issued a dissenting opinion and argued that there should be modifications to the current open-list proportional system to be more in line with Indonesia's national principles, Pancasila.
Pancasila refers to Indonesia's state philosophy that comprises five principles: Monotheism, civilised humanity, national unity, deliberative democracy and social justice.
A Constitutional Court's verdict is final and binding with no opportunity for appeal.
The court's decision on Thursday was vastly different from claims made by former deputy justice minister, Mr Denny Indrayana, who on May 28 said that he had received information from "a person whose credibility I trust greatly" that only three of the nine Constitutional Court judges purportedly agreed to keep the current system in place.
Speaking in an interview with Indonesia's MetroTV, Mr Indrayana said he is delighted with Thursday's verdict.
"I was hoping that the information (I received) was wrong," he told the television station after the verdict was read.
Constitutional Court judge Saldi Isra said although the former deputy minister's claims had tarnished the court's credibility and image, the court will not file a police report against him for criminal defamation.
Instead, the court will lodge a complaint to lawyer associations in Indonesia and Australia to which Mr Indrayana is a member. "Let the lawyer associations decide, whether what Denny Indrayana did can be considered an ethical violation or not," Mr Isra told reporters.
Indonesia's coordinating minister for politics, legal and security, Mohammad Mahfud Mahmodin, himself a former Constitutional Court judge, has earlier instructed the police to investigate Mr Indrayana's claims.
National Police spokesman Sandi Nugroho told reporters on Jun 2 that if the claims proved to be false, Mr Indrayana could be investigated for spreading misinformation under the country's criminal code as well as Information Technology and Electronic Transaction Law.
Indonesians are scheduled to hit the polls on Feb 14 next year when they will simultaneously cast their vote to elect the country's next president, members of parliament and several regional leaders. – CNA/ni(as)