Statement from SMAN 1 Pontianak Following Viral MPR Smart Quiz Response
The statement was uploaded by SMAN 1 Pontianak on its official Instagram account, as quoted on Tuesday (12/5/2026). The school stated that it had reviewed the replay and requested clarification from the organisers.
“In connection with the recommendation to watch the replay as an effort to confirm the conduct of the LCC 4 Pillars level West Kalimantan, we have carefully reviewed it again,” wrote SMAN 1 Pontianak.
“Based on those results, we found several matters that require attention and clarification,” it added.
SMAN 1 Pontianak detailed the findings from its review of the quiz footage. First, it noted that the substance of the answers from its team and the SMAN 1 Sambas team was the same, yet the judging panel only validated one without transparent explanation.
“There is similarity in the substance of answers between the SMAN 1 Pontianak team and SMAN 1 Sambas, but the judging panel gave validation only to one party without transparent explanation,” it wrote.
Furthermore, SMAN 1 Pontianak stated that the judging panel lacked focus in several assessments. The school also mentioned indications of power relations influencing the judges and the MC proceeding without resolution.
“There are indications of the use of power relations by the judging panel, without prior adequate confirmation and clarification processes. This is reinforced by one-sided validation through the MC regarding the judges’ competence, so the event continued without proportional resolution,” it wrote.
“Lack of focus by the judging panel in several assessment moments, which could potentially affect the objectivity of the results,” it added.
SMAN 1 Pontianak said its students had delivered their answer with clear and firm articulation. Therefore, the school believes its team deserved an objective assessment based on the answer’s substance.
“The SMAN 1 Pontianak team delivered the answer with clear and firm articulation, thus deserving an objective assessment according to the answer’s substance,” it wrote.
On that basis, SMAN 1 Pontianak requested the organisers to provide transparent explanations for these findings. The school also called for an evaluation of the assessment process.
“Based on the above, we request the organisers to provide official confirmation regarding the findings above. To convey transparent explanations regarding the basis for the judging panel’s decisions,” it wrote.
“To conduct an evaluation of the assessment process, in order to maintain the integrity and credibility of future LCC 4 Pillars activities,” it added.
In the circulating video viewed on Monday (11/5), the judge gave different scores to identical answers from participants. In the competition, Group C from SMAN 1 Pontianak received a minus five score for an answer related to the process of selecting BPK members.
However, a similar answer given by Group B from SMAN 1 Sambas was awarded 10 points by the same judge, namely the Head of the Assessment Bureau of the MPR RI Secretariat General, Dyastasita. Group C participants protested, feeling their answer was the same. But the judge stated that Group C’s answer did not clearly mention the Regional Representative Council (DPD).
MPR Evaluation
MPR RI Secretary General Siti Fauziah had previously spoken out. Siti said her side respects public attention and input regarding the dynamics in the competition.
Siti noted that the organising committee is currently conducting an internal investigation into the assessment of participants’ answers. Her side assured a comprehensive evaluation of the competition’s technical aspects.
“MPR RI will conduct a comprehensive evaluation of the competition’s technical aspects, including the assessment mechanism, clarity of answer articulation, participant answer verification system, and handling of objections in the competition, so that future similar activities can run even better, transparently, and accountably,” she added.