Camelia Pasandaran – There should be no change to the current allocation of legislative seats for the new House of Representatives, the Constitutional Court ruled on Friday.
Its decision to maintain the status quo strengthens the power of the General Elections Commission (KPU) and cuts across the recent Supreme Court ruling that would have seen seats given to smaller political parties reduced.
Chief Justice Mahfud MD said the court upheld the provisions in the 2008 Election Law on so-called second-round seat allocation as conditionally constitutional, thus siding with the plaintiffs.
The plaintiffs, a group of four political parties – the People's Conscience Party (Hanura), Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra), the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) and the United Development Party (PPP) – had filed for a judicial review at the same time the Supreme Court ruling invalidated the second-stage allocation as interpreted by the KPU.
The ruling in effect leaves the current proportional allocation of seats intact, with parties given seats according to their vote share after meeting a minimum threshold of the popular vote.
KPU member I Gusti Putu Artha said the court had vindicated the commission's interpretation of the law. "There are institutions or people saying we were wrong in calculating the votes for the second round of seat allocation," Putu said. "The Constitutional Court has corrected the record."
Putu said the Supreme Court should not have gotten involved in the first place. "When we interpreted the law, we had already consulted lawmakers," he said. "So our interpretation is right, and now it is proven by this ruling."
The Supreme Court ruling, if not superseded by Friday's action, would have reduced the number of seats for many small parties by applying a different formula. The action prompted howls of protest from a number parties, but the Constitutional Court appears to have rendered the issue moot.
The two courts have different jurisdictions, with the Supreme Court overseeing laws and regulations and the Constitutional Court ruling on matters pertaining to the charter.
In its ruling, the court said articles 205, 211 and 212 of the 2008 Election Law are all conditionally constitutional.
Article 205 was interpreted by the KPU as ruling out a second round of seat allocations for the House, which could have involved a complex calculation and removing smaller parties from seats in some instances. Articles 211 and 212 covers similar rules for provincial and district legislatures.
The four parties filing the judicial review argued the lawwas open to interpretation, with the KPU and the Supreme Court seeing it differently. They wanted the law annulled or declared conditionally constitutional.
The Constitutional Court refused to annul the articles, but the conditional status strengthens the KPU's power to interpret the law. The court said the ruling must apply to the 2009 election results.