Bobby Nasution-Surya's Victory in the North Sumatra Regional Election is Valid

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – The lawsuit filed by the gubernatorial candidate pair Edy Rahmayadi-Hasan Basri Sagala against the victory of Bobby Nasution-Surya in the North Sumatra Regional Head Election or Pilkada Sumut was dismissed by the Constitutional Court. All the arguments presented by Edy Rahmayadi-Hasan Basri, including structured, systematic, and massive violations such as the involvement of civil servants and village heads, as well as allegations of interference by the Minister of Home Affairs and the Acting Governor of North Sumatra to secure Bobby's win, were not proven.

"The Court does not have confidence in the truth of the main arguments of the applicant's petition. Therefore, regarding the aquo petition, there is no reason to postpone the validity of the provisions of Article 158 of Law Number 10 of 2016 relating to the applicant's legal standing as a formal requirement in filing a petition for disputes over the results of the gubernatorial, regent, and mayoral elections at the Court. Thus, there is no relevance in continuing the aquo petition in a further trial examination with an evidentiary agenda," said Constitutional Justice M Guntur Hamzah, while reading out the legal considerations in an open session led by Chief Justice Suhartoyo, Tuesday (4/2/2025).

The Constitutional Court stated that, without the need for further hearings with an agenda for evidence, it is already convinced that the stages of the 2024 North Sumatra Regional Election have been carried out in accordance with the stages and provisions. The issues that have arisen have also been resolved in accordance with the applicable regulations. The Constitutional Court also did not find any conditions or special events that could be a reason to postpone the enforcement of Article 158 of the Regional Election Law.

As is known, Article 158 of the Regional Head Election Law regulates the threshold requirements for a candidate pair to file an election result dispute to the Constitutional Court, which ranges from 0.5 percent to 2 percent of the total valid votes. The percentage of the vote margin is determined based on the population in the region holding the election.

For the North Sumatra Province, the threshold for the vote margin allowed to file a dispute is 0.5 percent multiplied by 5,654,922 votes, resulting in 28,275 votes. However, the vote margin between Bobby-Surya and Edy-Hasan Basri is 1,636,300 votes or about 28.94 percent. This is known from the vote count determined by the North Sumatra Provincial KPU, where Bobby-Surya received 3,645,611 votes and Edy-Hasan Basri received 2,009,311 votes.

Under these conditions, the Constitutional Court declared that Edy Rahmayadi-Hasan Basri Sagala does not have legal standing to file an election result dispute, thus the submitted request cannot be accepted.

Before the reading of the verdict, Suhartoyo emphasized that the decision on the dispute over the results of the North Sumatra Regional Election was made by only eight judges. Constitutional judge Anwar Usman exercised his right to abstain from participating in the decision and also expressed his opinion.

"According to constitutional judge Anwar Usman, this has nothing to do with the ethical decision that has been experienced before but purely because of volunteering, due to one's own will because they feel that one of the candidates still has family ties. That should be understood," said Suhartoyo.

In their application, Edy-Hasan argued that there were structured, systematic and massive violations that occurred in a number of districts, such as South Tapanuli, North Labuhan Batu, Asahan, Medan City and Langkat Regency.

The violations included the involvement of village heads or school principals and state civil servants to win Bobby-Surya. However, all the arguments put forward were not proven.

For example, the alleged mobilization of village heads in Asahan Regency who directed residents to vote for candidate pair number 1 (bobby-Surya) by giving five packs of Indomie and cooking oil. According to the Constitutional Court, the applicant did not clearly state when, to whom and how it was done so that the argument became unclear.

Regarding the alleged involvement of the Minister of Home Affairs to win Bobby-Surya by replacing the Acting Governor of North Sumatra Hasanuddin with Ahmad Fatoni, the Constitutional Court stated that the applicant did not attach sufficient evidence to support his argument. The applicant did not show when, where, and how the involvement of the Minister of Home Affairs in replacing the Acting Governor of North Sumatra so that the action showed bias towards one of the candidate pairs.

"The rotation carried out by the Minister of Home Affairs towards the Acting Governor is in accordance with the authority he has. Thus, the applicant's argument is legally groundless," said Guntur reading the Constitutional Court's considerations.

The applicant also argued that the Acting Governor of North Sumatra Agus Fatoni was involved in efforts to win Bobby Nasution by always involving Bobby in working visits to various districts/cities. This argument, by Bobby's legal team, was declared as slander. This is because Bobby's participation in the da'wah safari to various cities was in order to fulfill an invitation to make the XXI Aceh-North Sumatra PON a success and enliven it.

As is known, Bobby as the Mayor of Medan is included in the core committee structure for organizing PON XXI. Moreover, the safari da'wah activity was carried out in early August where Bobby had not been determined as a candidate for governor of North Sumatra by the KPU.

In this regard, the Constitutional Court stated that the applicant's argument was not proven. The applicant did not provide sufficient evidence to explain the special treatment given by the Acting Governor of North Sumatra to Bobby Nasution. Meanwhile, Bobby's party has been able to show that Bobby's presence in the da'wah safari activity was in order to carry out his duties in his capacity as Mayor of Medan who ex-officio is the core committee for organizing PON XXI.

"Thus, the Constitutional Court is of the opinion that the argument is legally baseless," said Guntur.