KPU Chairman Says Ganjar-Mahfud’s Witnesses and Experts Are Not Qualified, Ronny Talapessy Sindir Back

JAKARTA – Ganjar-Mahfud’s attorney, Ronny Talapessy, criticized KPU Chairman Hasyim Asy’ari. Ronny responded to Hasyim Asy’ari’s statement saying that the witnesses and experts presented by the Ganjar-Mahfud Legal Team were not qualified.

Regarding the statement made by Hasyim, Ronny found it difficult to accept this. Because, the Chairman of the KPU is considered to have personally concluded the matters regarding the witnesses and experts presented by the Ganjar-Mahfud Legal Team in the 2024 Presidential Election Results Dispute (PHPU) trial.

“The question of quality or not should be left to the MK panel of judges, not to KPU Chairman Hasyim,” said Ronny in his written statement, Saturday (6/5/2024).

Ronny, who attended the presidential election dispute trial at the Constitutional Court, assessed that the KPU chairman was caught sleeping during the trial so he did not listen to the statements of witnesses and experts presented by the Ganjar-Mahfud Legal Team.

“Based on that, it was difficult for Hasyim to be able to assess the testimony of the witnesses and experts that we presented because at the same time the person concerned was sleeping,” said Ronny.

“I also find it difficult to accept Hasyim’s statement because as chairman of the KPU, he has been repeatedly sanctioned or warned strongly by the DKPP (Election Organizer Honorary Council) for violating the code of conduct or code of ethics as an election organizer,” said Ronny.

Looking further back, Ronny continued, the KPU chairman and other commissioners did not implement electoral governance related to Gibran’s candidacy. The DKPP decided that KPU chairman Hasyim violated the code of ethics because the current legal situation is different from previous elections and different from the MK decisions in case 90/PUU-XXI/2023.

“In other words, the KPU chairman and commissioners violated these principles and were proven to have violated the code of ethics because they accepted Gibran’s candidacy without creating a new PKPU. Based on this, I conclude that the KPU did not hold the election professionally and created legal uncertainty,” he concluded.

(rca)