Doli Challenges KPU to Come Clean on Alleged Smuggling of PKPU Article for Gibran
Baca dalam 60 detik
- Ahmad Doli Kurnia meminta KPU transparan mengenai asal-usul Pasal 18 ayat (3) PKPU Nomor 19 Tahun 2023 yang diduga diselundupkan untuk meloloskan Gibran Rakabuming Raka.
- Doli mengklaim pasal tersebut tidak pernah masuk dalam draf resmi yang diterima DPR dan baru muncul setelah putusan MK Nomor 90, sementara KPU bersikeras norma itu sudah dibahas sejak rapat konsinyering 19 September 2023.
- Komisi II DPR berencana menggelar rapat resmi meski masa reses, dengan kemungkinan menghadirkan eks Ketua KPU Hasyim Asy'ari untuk menguji dalil kedua pihak.
Ahmad Doli Kurnia, a member of House Commission II from the Golkar Party faction, has challenged the General Elections Commission (KPU) to lay bare the origins of Article 18 paragraph (3) of KPU Regulation No. 19 of 2023. The article is suspected of having been smuggled in so that Gibran Rakabuming Raka would qualify as a vice-presidential candidate in the 2024 presidential election. Doli issued the challenge at the Parliamentary Complex in Senayan, Jakarta, on Monday (12/10), as he demanded a regulatory audit of what he called procedural irregularities.
The disputed article provides an exemption from the high school graduation certificate requirement for presidential or vice-presidential candidates who studied abroad and hold a university degree. That norm became the entry point for Gibran, who does not hold a high school diploma from a foreign school but completed higher education. Doli stressed he was ready to open all documents if the KPU was willing to do the same. "If we really want to open things up, then let's open them. I am ready. Let us show the public which parts were not smuggled and which were smuggled," he said.
The House Legislation Body (Baleg) deputy chair said he had asked Commission II leaders to hold a formal meeting during the recess to discuss the controversy. He would not even object to Hasyim Asy'ari, KPU chair for the 2022–2024 period, being brought in directly. Doli also said he had communicated with the previous Commission II leadership and scheduled a physical meeting soon. "I have consolidated with colleagues from the previous Commission II. In the near future we may meet in person," he said.
Doli insisted Article 18 paragraph (3) was never part of the official text received by the House. According to him, the article only appeared after the Constitutional Court (MK) issued Ruling No. 90, which paved the way for Gibran. However, he later realized the norm had existed before the MK ruling. "The draft we received did not contain it. The official one we received did not contain it. But there was a letter that came in, it suddenly appeared and was not shown. My suspicion was that this article was inserted after the MK ruling, but it turns out it was before the MK ruling," he said.
"The substance of the draft norm was already present during the discussion of the Draft PKPU at the Konsinyering Meeting forum on 19 September 2023. That konsinyering meeting was held before the Hearing at House Commission II on 20 September 2023." — Idham Holik, KPU RI Member
The KPU, through member Idham Holik, strongly denied the smuggling accusation. He explained that the draft norm had been discussed at a konsinyering meeting on 19 September 2023, a day before the hearing with House Commission II on 20 September 2023. Idham's statement was the election organizer's first official rebuttal since the controversy erupted. The KPU stressed there was no secret insertion of an article because the entire discussion process followed the applicable mechanism.
The controversy highlights weak documentation and transparency in the legislative process for election regulations. If a crucial article could indeed move without a meeting record, then the integrity of election governance is at stake. Conversely, if the KPU can prove the norm existed from the start, Doli's accusation could amount to a political attack that erodes public trust in the House. Both sides are now demanding evidence from each other, while the public waits to see whether the Commission II meeting will actually be held or merely become a political maneuver during the recess.
Most crucially, this case is not just about one article. It touches on the accountability of election regulation-making, which should be free from short-term electoral interests. Doli and the KPU both have the opportunity to prove who is right. But without full disclosure of documents and an open meeting, the smuggling allegation will continue to haunt the credibility of the 2024 presidential election. Will Commission II dare to hold an open meeting, or will this controversy sink into the recess agenda?
