Bills contain conflicting solutions to election rows

Bills contain conflicting solutions to election rows

Kurniawan Hari, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

A lack of coordination among legislators has resulted in
conflicting articles on the resolution of disputes over vote
counting in a presidential election.

Possible disputes are provided for in the presidential
elections bill and the constitutional court bill, both of which
are currently being deliberated by the House of Representatives.

Regarding possible disputes over the results of ballot
counting, the presidential elections bill states that only
presidential candidates and their running mates will be allowed
to lodge complaints.

But the bill on the constitutional court opens the chance for
political parties or coalitions of parties, as well as
presidential candidates, to challenge the results of the count.

Firman Jaya Daeli, a member of the House committee
deliberating the presidential elections bill, asserted on Friday
that the constitutional court bill should follow the presidential
elections bill in this matter.

"All factions (on the special committee) have reached an
agreement on the issue. Therefore, the constitutional court bill
must follow suit," Firman said.

The constitutional court bill was initiated by the House,
while the presidential elections bill was sponsored by the
government.

The House committee deliberating the presidential elections
bill agreed to allow only presidential candidates and their
running mates to file complaints with the Constitutional Court
for the sake of efficiency and the quick resolution of disputes.

Another legislator, Baharuddin Aritonang, who helped draft the
constitutional court bill, suggested that the two special
committees deliberating the presidential elections and
constitutional court bills should arrange a meeting to
synchronize the provisions of the two bills.

"Laws must not clash with each other. There must be a meeting
to iron out the differences before endorsement," Aritonang told
The Jakarta Post on Friday.

The two bills are scheduled for endorsement at the end of this
month.

The establishment of the Constitutional Court is mandated by
the amended Constitution. It says the court should be set up by
Aug. 17, 2003.

Unlike the existing Supreme Court, which oversees the
religious, public, military and administrative courts, the
Constitutional Court will deal with election-related disputes and
disputes between state institutions.

The Constitutional Court will have the authority to settle
disputes over ballot counts and conflicts among state
institutions, to dissolve political parties and to give final
judgment over violations committed by the president as complained
of by House legislators. The latter could lead to the impeachment
of the President.

Pressure has mounted for the President, the House and Supreme
Court to select the nine members to sit on the Constitutional
Court in a transparent manner as the positions are highly
strategic.