Election Disputes Research Articles

Putusan Konstitusional Demokratis Terhadap Sengketa Pemilu Serentak 2024

The Constitutional Court is a judicial institution that has the authority to resolve disputes over general election results. If the election law is not revised, then in 2024 there will be simultaneous elections and simultaneous regional elections. This study is to find out how the challenges of the Constitutional Court are in producing democratic constitutional decisions on 2024 Simultaneous election disputes and to find out how the role of the Constitutional Court in producing democratic constitutional decisions on 2024 Simultaneous election disputes. This type of research is legal research, in the development of legal research methods normative legal research and legal research empirical legal research must be combined or used both because combining the two studies will provide comprehensive research results. The institution as a judicial institution that adjudicates PHPU will face several challenges: 1) The readiness of the Constitutional Court in providing optimal services, 2) The political pressure of the presidential election is so hot, 3) the time and quality of the decision is short. The Constitutional Court's decision must truly reflect a fair decision within the framework of implementing constitutional democracy. A fair decision can only be given by a statesman judge, not merely a judge who is an adherent of the principle of legality who goes too far and becomes the mouthpiece of the law (bouche de la loi), which should be the mouthpiece of substantive justice

THE VALIDITY OF BAWASLU'S LEGAL DECISIONS HANDLING ELECTION VIOLATIONS

This study will discuss the validity of the Bawaslu's decision on election violations. Because, according to preliminary findings, with the issuance of Law No. 7 of 2017 the position of Bawaslu is stronger. In this Law, Bawaslu in handling election disputes can not only provide recommendations to the KPU but also provide or make decisions that must be implemented by the parties. This means that Bawaslu currently has broader authority in handling election cases such as administrative violations and other violations. Then how is the validity of the legal decision from the Bawaslu? The method used in this research is in the category of normative legal research with a statute approach and a conceptual approach.

Reflection on Albanian Legislation Related to the Resolution of Electoral Disputes and Its Approximate with International Practices and Standards

Issues related to the Resolution of Electoral Disputes in the Albanian legislation began to be addressed only after the change of the government system, in the early 90s. The Constitution of the Republic of Albania, approved on November 28, 1998, created the necessary legislative basis for dealing with these issues in accordance with international legal standards. According to the Albanian legislation the Electoral Administration Zone Commissions and the Central Election Commission are responsibly the administrative review of complaints and appeals. The Electoral College as an ad hoc electoral court-has the responsibility to judge the electoral appeals. The Albanian legal framework related to the Resolution of Electoral Disputes is developed having as their main objective the respect of the standards that condition equality in the right to appeal, transparency and increased effectiveness in the administration and adjudication of complaints and appeals.International observers have evaluated positively the efforts and results achieved in the legislative process for the drafting of the legal framework for the administrative review and trial of electoral complaints and appeals in Albania.The developments in the Albanian electoral legislation for the Resolution of Electoral Disputes are guided by the recommendations given by the international observers of the OSCE/ODIHR and the standards set by the Venice Commission.The changes in the Albanian legislation for the Resolution of Electoral Disputes have as their main objective the respect of the standards that condition equality in the right to appeal, transparency and increased effectiveness in the administration and adjudication of complaints and appeals.

Empowering the Election Supervisory Agency: Enforcement of Law Number 7 of 2017 on General Elections

The implementation of elections in Indonesia is governed by Law No. 7 of 2017 on General Elections, which establishes regulations for simultaneous elections. This law grants quasi-judicial authority to the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) in addressing administrative and procedural violations of the electoral process, with sanctions imposed through Electoral Observer Decisions. This aspect has motivated the authors to investigate the enlargement and implications of Bawaslu's supervisory authority through case analyses. This research aims to analyze the (a) expansion of authority granted to Bawaslu and (b) implementation of Bawaslu's authority in handling election violations and resolving disputes in Lampung Province in accordance with Law No. 7 of 2017. The research employs a normative-empirical legal research methodology, utilizing primary, secondary, and tertiary law sources analyzed qualitatively. Findings reveal an augmentation of Bawaslu's authority in four key areas: handling criminal election violations, addressing violations of election organizers' ethical codes, managing election administration violations, and resolving election disputes. The process of enhancing Bawaslu's authority is characterized by the quasi-judicial handling of administrative violations and election disputes across four electoral regimes.

Study of the Verdict of Constitutional Court on Regional Leaders Election Dispute in the Province of East Nusa Tenggara in 2018

The election has been a momentum of the people to flourish democratization and open pathways to advance the development of the area. Since then, eleven (11) local elections took place in NTT in 2018 consisting of 10 (ten) local elections to elect the local officeholders at the district or municipality level and 1 (one) regional election to elect Governor were held simultaneously on 27 June 2018 in which 50% of the elections filled a lawsuit against the dispute of the local election result to the Constitutional Court in which all submissions were rejected due absence of legal standing and inadequate reason. The study is made to scrutinize and to understand the local elections that took place in 2008 and 2018 and the disputes for the reference of the prospective regional leaders participating the 2020 election contest. The qualitative documentary research uses descriptive analytical approach to examine the implementation of the Constitutional Court rules and regulation were based on three (3) conditions namely (1) the authority of the Constitutional Court; (2) the legal standing of the supplicants, and (3) the tolerance to the time allotment. The outcome shows that 3 (three) things attributed to the decline of the lawsuit by the Constitutional Court namely (1) the delicacy of the juridical status and insufficient legitimate reasons of the claim; (2) the inability to persuasively present substantiation in the court; and (3) the invalid legality of the lawsuit.

Electoral Dispute Resolution in Ghana since 1992: An Assessment of the Role of the Judiciary Arm of State

Since becoming a constitutional democracy in 1993, many electoral disputes have arisen in Ghana following elections, with both state and non-state agencies playing key roles in the resolution of these disputes at the levels of general elections, bye-elections, assembly elections, inter alia. The focus of this paper, however, is an examination of the effectiveness of the electoral dispute resolution role of the judiciary arm of state, as mandated under Articles 64(1) and 99(1) of the 1992 Fourth Republican Ghanaian Constitution. Additionally, this paper seeks to identify the underlining causes of electoral disputes in Ghana, as well as, assess the potency of the electoral structure of the country. The study adapted the qualitative research approach in gathering data from 120 respondents that were purposively selected across 16 administrative regions in the country, in addition to the use of secondary and tertiary data. The study argues that the Apex Court namely, the Supreme Court of Ghana has been largely effective in terms of electoral disputes resolution, with a bigger chunk of the credit, however, going to the citizens who are law abiding and peace loving. Furthermore, actions and inactions of the Electoral Commission (EC) as well as political parties in Ghana, have gravely contributed to the spate of electoral disputes in Ghana. Against the backdrop of these findings, it is recommended amongst others that, judges of the Superior Court of Judicature dispense justice fairly and impartially and devoid of material and political underpinnings; whilst electoral officials are urged to play the role of impartial umpires throughout election processes. The researcher argues further that, should stakeholders carefully implement recommendations of this study; the confidence of the electorate in the Ghanaian electoral system will soar once more.

Patricians, plebeians and parishioners: parish elections and social conflict in eighteenth-century Chelsea

ABSTRACT This article sheds new light on social relations in early eighteenth-century Britain through a case study of three parish elections held in Chelsea between 1708 and 1723. The results of these elections were disputed in the ecclesiastical courts, generating over 400 folio pages of witness depositions. These depositions reveal a sustained conflict between the local gentry and the middling sort over control of parish offices. At the heart of this conflict was a contest over who could be considered an independent voter. Independence was the central quality required for participation in parish politics and was thought to belong exclusively to heads of household who contributed to local taxes. In election disputes, each side claimed that their opponents’ supporters failed to meet these criteria and that they had benefited from the votes of people who were too poor to make independent political choices. By arguing over voter independence, Chelsea residents contested the boundary between ‘parishioners’ with a right to participate in local government and the poor who were excluded by their dependence on others. Parish elections were both manifestations of social hierarchy and key sites of social conflict.

The Functionality of the Election Tribunal in Nigeria concerning Election Petition

This paper scrutinises whether it is possible to have Court-Connected Alternative Dispute Resolution, hereinafter ADR, to cover election petitions in Nigeria. An election petition is a peculiar breed of adversarial matters litigated over in courts, which is exclusively created for the sole purpose of reaching a speedy resolution within the allocated time frame provided by the law. There are no provisions, under the extant legal framework for elections and election disputes in Nigeria, for the use of court-connected ADR to resolve or settle election disputes. The zero-sum nature of Nigerian politics, characterised as the winner takes all; the loser takes none, coupled with the fact that elections are prone to violence and corruption because the seats for grabs are very lucrative- government positions make election disputes unarguably unsuitable for ADR mechanisms. However, the ADR strategy of looking at the interests of the parties rather than at their positions may hold some hope for applying ADR options to election disputes. An interest-based perspective to resolving disputes holds more promise than the traditional position-based perspective. Hence, the paper will analyse what the election tribunal does and whether it has ever used ADR as an option in its history. If not, what hopes are held out that Court-Connected ADR or induced ADR could ever be introduced to disputes concerning an area hotly contested as an election petition? The paper employs qualitative, primary and secondary resources to tackle the above-stated questions. Keywords: Alternative Dispute Resolution; Election Tribunal; Election Petition; Political Parties and Nigeria.

Mekanisme Penyelesaian Sengketa Pemilihan Umum di Indonesia

This study describes the resolution of general election disputes in Indonesia. Elections should be a democratic party filled with enjoy, starting from preparation, and implementation to receiving election results through a process with integrity. However, the opposite is possible, so it is necessary to explain the mechanism for resolving general election disputes. This paper uses a library research method and is a normative juridical legal research with secondary data such as books, journals, and other documents used as the main data using a statute approach. From the research conducted, it is concluded that: First, the general election is a means of people's sovereignty to elect members of the People's Representative Council (DPR), members of the Regional Representatives Council (DPD), President and Vice President, and to elect members of the Regional People's Representative Council (DPRD). which is carried out directly, publicly, freely, confidentially, honestly, and fairly within the Unitary State of the Republic of Indonesia based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Second, the dispute resolution of the election process can be carried out through the General Elections Supervisory Agency or abbreviated as Bawaslu, and through the State Administrative Court. However, disputes over election results can only be resolved through the Constitutional Court. Third, the resolution of process disputes and outcome disputes can be followed by mediation and adjudication procedures.

Complaint Authority for Constitutional Complaint by Indonesia’s Constitutional Court

Constitutional Court will be able to provide protection for constitutional rights which will produce institutions that are able to provide answers to reforms. The presence of the Constitutional Court third amendment to the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, which became the basis of Article 24C. The legitimacy of the Constitutional Court in a limited way is formulated, namely: to begin, to investigate legislation that violates the constitution, to adjudicate disputes over the power of state institutions vested with constitutional authority, and to adjudicate the dissolution of political parties and settlement, the four general election disputes. In the modern state administration discourse, it currently requires the Constitutional Court to expand the scope of its authority in relation to Constitutional Complaints or commonly referred to as Constitutional Complaints. The necessity of one of these powers can be seen in the number of state institutions that violate the constitutional rights of citizens through the actions of these institutions. However, the channel for this complaint still does not exist, only that currently exists in providing protection for the right of Constitutional Complaints to be protected through judicial review of the basic constitution as regulated in the constitution.

Penyelesaian Pelanggaran Administrasi Pemilu oleh Bawaslu

Introduction: The legal issues in this writing include how are the legal arrangements regarding the settlement of general election administration by Bawaslu and how to resolve election disputes by Bawaslu.
 Purposes of the Research: This writing aims to find out and analyze how to resolve violations of general election administration by Bawaslu.
 Methods of the Research: The research method used is normative, that is, research that primarily examines positive legal provisions and legal principles, explain and predicts in the direcrion of future legal developments
 Results Originality Findings of the Research: The findings of this study prove that in legal arrangements regarding the settlement of election administrative violations by Bawaslu and the settlement mechanism that in an effort to resolve administrative violations, Bawaslu has the authority to resolve administrative violations in accordance with the provisions of the Bawaslu laws and regulations and the General Election Commission. The settlement mechanism based on the Election Law is not explained significantly but it is explained that non-criminal violations are administrative violations and these violations are reported and followed up by Bawaslu and the General Elections Commission.

Special Courts for the Settlement of Regional Head Election Disputes in the Context of Realizing the Principle of Legal Certainty and Orderly Governane

Law Number 12 of 2008 violates the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Article 157(1) of Law Number 8 of 2015 stipulates that the settlement of disputes over the results of direct regional head elections is under the jurisdiction of a special court, but until the establishment of a special court, the Constitutional Court still has the power to resolve disputes over the results of direct elections. The results of the research are expected to be able to answer constitutional issues in Indonesia, especially regarding the urgency of the establishment of a special court for the election of regional heads and the extent to which the design model for special courts for the election of regional heads is in order to ensure the quality of democracy. In addition, as a discourse for students who are in the field of Constitutional Law, it requires constructive thinking. This research uses a normative juridical approach which emphasizes literature research. The portrait of dispute resolution on the results of regional head elections continues to experience dynamics along with interpretations of the institutionalization of regional head elections as part of the general election regime or not.

Special Courts for the Settlement of Regional Head Election Disputes in the Context of Realizing the Principle of Legal Certainty and Orderly Governane

Law Number 12 of 2008 violates the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Article 157(1) of Law Number 8 of 2015 stipulates that the settlement of disputes over the results of direct regional head elections is under the jurisdiction of a special court, but until the establishment of a special court, the Constitutional Court still has the power to resolve disputes over the results of direct elections. The results of the research are expected to be able to answer constitutional issues in Indonesia, especially regarding the urgency of the establishment of a special court for the election of regional heads and the extent to which the design model for special courts for the election of regional heads is in order to ensure the quality of democracy. In addition, as a discourse for students who are in the field of Constitutional Law, it requires constructive thinking. This research uses a normative juridical approach which emphasizes literature research. The portrait of dispute resolution on the results of regional head elections continues to experience dynamics along with interpretations of the institutionalization of regional head elections as part of the general election regime or not.

Establishment Of A General Election Court System In Indonesia

General election disputes in Indonesia frequently cause political and legal issues. Unfortunately, an established dispute resolution institution is not available. This article aims to address this need by addressing the reasons existing legal policy on general election dispute resolution has not succeeded in resolving general election disputes transparently, accountably, and fairly, and the legal policy design and requirements of an ideal general election court for the future. This was a normative legal study using a statutory, case, and conceptual approach. The results of the study showed that the existing legal policy of general election dispute resolution has not been manifested as a strong and stable institution. Two courts, namely the Supreme Court and the Constitutional Court, with different characters and constitutional mandates, alternately have become the forum for resolving general election disputes. The different procedures and decisions between the two courts often negate each other, causing legal uncertainty which ultimately fails to provide justice. In the future, therefore, it is necessary to establish a general election court institution with a special mandate to adjudicate election disputes based on the Election Law to create legal consistency, legal certainty, and fair settlement of election disputes.

The Dispute of the Simultaneous Village Head Election: A Case Study in North Luwu Regency

This study aims to describe the simultaneous Village Head election disputes in 2016 and 2018 in North Luwu Regency. This research combines normative juridical and empirical research methods. The primary data were collected using direct interviews, while the secondary data was collected using literature study techniques. The data obtained in this research were then analyzed qualitatively to describe problems and answer study purposes. The results show the implementation of the simultaneous Village Head election of 2016 and 2018 in North Luwu Regency, consisting of 64 Villages. Of the 64 simultaneous Village Head elections, six of them are still considered to contain legal defects by several candidates. Accordingly, the six candidates submitted lawsuits against the simultaneous Village Head election results at the State Administrative Court to prove the violation. In this case, there are two lawsuits for Regent Decision No. 188.4.45/386/VI/2016 and four for Regent Decision No. 188.4.45/479/XI/2018. One of the six lawsuits was granted by the Judge in the Decision of the State Administrative Court, but the Decision of the State Administrative High Court voided the Court Decision of the first instance. In contrast, the other five lawsuits were immediately dismissed by the Judge at the Decision of the State Administrative Court. Therefore, it is recommended that the Regency Government be able to predict and provide solutions to a series of problems that will arise at all stages of implementing the simultaneous Village Head election. In this case, to minimize future disputes of the simultaneous Village Head election.

Analysis of mechanisms for appealing against decisions, actions or inactions related to the electoral process in Ukraine

The article examines of mechanism for appealing against decisions, actions or inactions related to the election process. It is stated that in the election process there are inevitable disputes that need to be resolved quickly, as the election process is a temporary and fleeting phenomenon. The Electoral Code of Ukraine guarantees the right to appeal against decisions, actions or inactions concerning the election process to a court or election commissions. Ukrainian legislation provides judicial and administrative procedures for resolving election disputes, which differ in the range of entities that have the right to appeal, the subject of appeal, the procedure for reviewing applications, the legal consequences of decisions.
 It was emphasized that the judicial procedure of resolving election disputes is a priority in comparison with the consideration of these disputes by election commissions. A comparative analysis of the Electoral Code of Ukraine and the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine of the subject of judicial appeal, which allowed to trace the numerous problems associated with the use of certain terms and structures, which requires changes in these regulations to harmonize them, which will positively affect the mechanism of protection of the rights and legitimate interests of the subjects of the election process.
 It is noted that not only courts and election commissions are the subjects of resolving election disputes. Such entities include the State Register of Voters and law enforcement agencies. The legal status of the prosecutor in the administrative court process as a subject of protection of citizens' voting rights has been studied.
 Attention is drawn to the fact that accurate and strict observance by administrative courts of the Code of Administrative Procedure of Ukraine during the consideration of disputes concerning legal relations related to the electoral process is a prerequisite for ensuring their proper and prompt resolution to protect the rights, freedoms and interests of voters and others. subjects of the election process.

ALTERNATIF DESAIN PENYELENGGARAAN PEMILIHAN UMUM PASCA PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI

The decision for the implementation of the concurrent general election to elect members of the People’s Representative Council, the Regional Representatives Council, the Regional People’s Representative Council, and the President and Vice President on the same day has caused many problems at the regulatory and technical levels so that it makes the general election undemocratic, ineffective, and inefficient. Therefore, it needs to be re-examined the meaning and alternative implementation designs of the more proper concurrent general election. This juridical-normative research uses conceptual, statutory, historical and case study approach. The results indicated that general elections must be held concurrently. There are many models of separating the implementation of concurrent general elections which are constitutional such as the separation based on the division of local and national general elections, the separation based on the regional level, and the separation based on qualifications of branches of power. With these various designs that have been offered, the implementation of the general elections will no longer be carried out within one day. Eventually, it makes the entire election process and the election dispute settlement process run according to the election principles mandated by the constitution.

Invalidity of Election Results: Concept and Features of Constitutional and Legal Nature

The article is devoted to the research of the special constitutional and legal nature of invalidity of results of elections. The approaches expressed in the legal literature to understanding and interpreting the invalidity of the election results as a category of constitutional law are analyzed. The author's determination of invalidity of election results is proposed. The invalidity of the election results as a constitutional and legal category should be understood to mean the irreparable legal defect of the held elections established by the decision of the jurisdictional body (election commission or court) within its competence, which, in connection with violations of the electoral law, does not reveal the actual will of voters and entails legal nullity (lack of legal effect) of their result. The invalidity of the voting results is meant to mean the irreparable legal defects of the voting conducted in a certain part of the territory of the constituency established by the decision of the jurisdictional body (election commission or court) within its competence, which, due to violations of the voting rules, the establishment of voting results and other electoral procedures, does not allow to establish the actual will of voters and entails the legal nullity of the results of such voting. The article justifies the conclusion that the invalidation of the election results is a restorative measure (measure of protection) of constitutional and legal coercion. Among the main shortcomings of modern constitutional and legal regulation of invalidation of election results, the following circumstances are noted in the article: 1) the legislator does not give a legal definition of constitutional and legal terms ≪invalidity of voting results≫ and ≪invalidity of election results≫; 2) the current electoral legislation contains a single list of grounds both for invalidating the results of the vote and for invalidating the results of the election; 3) in the regulation of the grounds for recognizing the voting results and election results as invalid, the texts of the current election laws dominate the assessment signs over the formally defined ones. According to the author, these deficiencies in the current electoral law seriously complicate the work of the courts in resolving electoral disputes about the invalidity of elections.

DAYA MENGIKAT PUTUSAN PANITIA PENGAWAS PEMILU DALAM PENYELESAIAN SENGKETA PEMILIHAN KEPALA DAERAH

This study aims to analyze the Binding Power of the Panwaslu's Decision in the dispute resolution trial for the parties, and to analyze whether the KPUD violates the law if it does not implement the Panwaslu's decision in the Settlement of Pilkada Disputes. This study uses a normative legal research type, in this case it is intended to conduct an assessment of the legal basis and legal doctrine related to the Binding Power of the Decisions of the Election Supervisory Committee in the Settlement of Regional Head Election Disputes. The legal material analysis technique used is prescriptive, in which the author provides a formulation of the concept of applying the rules of norms that can be used to solve the problems at hand. From this research, it can be seen that the binding power of the Panwaslu Decision in the settlement of regional election disputes based on Article 144 paragraph (1) of Law Number 10 of 2016 concerning the Second Amendment to Law Number 1 of 2015 concerning Stipulation of Government Regulations in Lieu of Law Number 1 of 2014 Regarding the Election of Governors, Regents, and Mayors to become a law, it is binding. So that it is clear to get legal certainty for the parties to the dispute, the administration, and the organizers. As well as requiring the KPU to carry out or follow up on the Panwaslu's decision, this is also regulated in Article 144 paragraph (2) of Law Number 10 of 2016, so that as a legal state that adheres to and is based on law, the KPU is obliged to comply with what is said. written in the rules. As part of the State Administration Officials and Election Organizers, the KPU is obliged to carry out the decision. And of course, sanctions must be given if they do not carry out the decision, because the KPU can be said to have violated the law.

The role of electoral appeals in giving legitimacy to the general elections - a comparative study between Syria, Egypt and France: دور الطعون الانتخابية في إضفاء صفة المشروعية على الانتخابات العامة - دراسة مقارنة بين سورية ومصر وفرنسا-

This research aimed at clarify the role of electoral appeals in legitimizing the general elections in all its stages. The descriptive analytical approach and the comparative deductive approach were relied upon to reach the desired results, the most important of which are: 1- Electoral disputes and challenges arising from them are considered a tool to achieve the legitimacy of the general elections. 2- The electoral register is one of the foundations of the legality of the election. 3- The right to run for office is a right guaranteed to all citizens who meet the conditions specified by laws. Among the most important recommendations: 1- An accurate and comprehensive electoral appeals system should be developed that is characterized by simplicity and speed of decision making. 2- The Syrian legislator should follow in the footsteps of the Egyptian and French legislation in determining the right of others to challenge the voter register. 3- Building integrated and accurate systems for electoral appeals and adopting the successful experiences of some countries.