ANALISIS YURIDIS PUTUSAN MAHKAMAH KONSTITUSI NO. 45/PHPU.D- VIII/2010 TENTANG DISIKUALIFIKASI DAN PENETAPAN PEMENANG PILKADA KOTA WARINGIN BARAT

Abstract

The decision of the Constitutional Court Number 45/PHPU.D-VIII/2010 decided to win
one of the candidate pairs, namely the Ujang-Bambang pair and disqualify the Sugianto-Eko
Soemarno pair as the winner of the West Kotawaringin election. The authority of the
Constitutional Court in deciding disputes over general election results is regulated in Article
24C paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. Based on these
problems the authors are interested in knowing first, what is the authority of the Constitutional
Court in deciding disputes over the results of the regional head elections No.45/PHPU.D -
VIII/2010 Concerning the Disqualification and Determination of Winners of the West Waringin
City Election, are they in accordance with their authority as regulated in Article 24 C
paragraph (1) of the 1945 Constitution? Second, what are the implications of the decision of
the Constitutional Court No. 45/PHPU.D-VIII/2010 on voter sovereignty in determining
Regional Heads in West Kotawaringin Regency?
This type of research is classified as normative legal research with the type of legal
principles. In normative legal research, the data source is secondary data consisting of primary
legal materials, secondary legal materials and tertiary legal materials. The collection of
normative legal research data uses data collection techniques using library research. The data
obtained through the literature study will be analyzed qualitatively. In drawing conclusions
the author uses a deductive method of thinking, namely a way of thinking that draws
conclusions from a general statement or proposition into a specific statement.
Based on the results of the research and discussion, it can be concluded that, firstly, the
Constitutional Court Decision Number 45/PHPU.D-VIII/2010 concerning the General
Election Dispute for the Regional Head of West Kotawaringin Regency, the Constitutional
Court has decided beyond the petition submitted by the applicant and decided beyond the
authority of the Constitutional Court, namely decided to disqualify the winning pair for the
West Kotawaringin election, namely the H. Sugianto and H Eko Soemarno, SH and set Dr. H.
Ujang and Iskandar ST., M.Si as the elected Regent and Deputy Regent. Second, the issuance

of this decision itself has its own impact on the implementation of the West Kotawaringin post-
conflict local election. The West Kotawaringin election has become unclear. In this case, the

KPUD has not implemented the decision of the Constitutional Court. The grace period for
implementing the decision and anomalies in the provisions of the law. The law stipulates that
the Constitutional Court's decision has permanent legal force since it has been pronounced in
a plenary session which is open to the public, so from that moment on, the decision must be
implemented. In fact, it is impossible for the Constitutional Court's decision to be followed up
immediately after the decision is read. It takes process and time to follow up on decisions.