METROTV — broadcast
20261012 143000 UTC
455 transcript segments
Google Cloud Speech-to-Text API (Chirp) + Gemini 2.5 Flash Non-Thinking
Data courtesy of The GDELT Project (https://www.gdeltproject.org/), from the Internet Archive TV News Archive.
Machine transcription. Treat it as a searchable index of what was broadcast, not a verbatim quotation record.

[00:00:00] the law, namely the DPR and the government, in the broadcast
[00:00:03] consultation with the DPR and the government, this was also not
[00:00:07] disclosed and explained by the KPU.
[00:00:10] Okay, Mas Bil, this is regarding PKPU 19, which then had two
[00:00:14] different statements between Commission 2
[00:00:18] option is to find a diploma that of the DPR and the former KPU chairman, and earlier Mbak Titi also said that it seemed like with these differences,
[00:00:21] it seemed like there was an attempt to smuggle or there was an attempt to cover up.
[00:00:25] What's your response, Mas Bil? Yes,
[00:00:28] first of all, that's what was debated before the trial.
[00:00:32] It turned out that in the trial, it was also not revealed that there was indeed
[00:00:35] a smuggling of articles. Now, Mas Hasim, the former
[00:00:38] KPU chairman, has also started to speak up that he
[00:00:42] rejects the accusation that it was a smuggled article. In fact, he gave a chain message
[00:00:46] to the media, telling the chronology of that
[00:00:50] 2029, so the path Article 18, not just PKPU 19. Article 18 paragraph
[00:00:53] 3, why and how it appeared. There was even a public test.
[00:00:56] That's why, to make sure, I don't think this forum is appropriate. What
[00:01:00] Mbak Titi said, and including me, I don't have such power unless
[00:01:04] there is a more specific forum than
[00:01:06] they follow up. Some the trial. Just bring the former KPU chairman and also
[00:01:09] the KPU itself to show if there is indeed
[00:01:12] a draft, if there is indeed a signature, if there is indeed an initial. I think that's
[00:01:16] the second thing. If this then involves Gibran, I think this is also
[00:01:19] a bit offside because Gibran himself once passed the regional election,
[00:01:22] where the regional election PKPU also had to then provide
[00:01:26] a kind of letter or diploma that was from abroad,
[00:01:30] and Mas Gibran included that. That's why it was proven in the facts
[00:01:33] of the trial that there were two certificates. The first was a
[00:01:36] certificate of attendance and a direct letter from UTS Insert,
[00:01:40] and that data exists, right? So it's not necessary. So without
[00:01:43] PKPU 19 2023, Article 18,
[00:01:47] what, Article 3, I think Gibran would still pass because
[00:01:50] the election law states that the minimum
[00:01:53] requirement is to graduate from high school, which is proven by a certificate.
[00:01:57] That's why the certificate has the phrase "graduated" first. Second,
[00:02:00] it is also proven by Article 227 letter
[00:02:04] L, which states that there is another certificate, which is also a certificate. Now, this is what, in my opinion,
[00:02:08] we need to clarify. So Gibran is someone who takes advantage
[00:02:11] of the law, not someone who then, what is it?
[00:02:15] Uses the law for things
[00:02:17] agriculture, subsidized that don't have articles that are then brought up. I think that's
[00:02:20] good. I think that's it. Before moving on to Pak Hozi, Mbak Titi, do you have any
[00:02:23] comments? Yes, in this context, once again, if
[00:02:27] we read the trial evidence, this is when the Constitutional Court
[00:02:31] decided, first, the argument used by the petitioner, if
[00:02:34] we read the petition, he argued TST
[00:02:37] that is, how the structured,
[00:02:40] systematic, and planned conditioning was done to
[00:02:44] pass, with the term "making regulations that
[00:02:47] make it easier." The second is the issue of the certificate. Now, in the
[00:02:51] explanation of the legal considerations of the court, the court immediately
[00:02:54] went to the certificate because the court saw it as something that
[00:02:57] was intertwined. The problem is... when the court examined
[00:03:01] the certificate, the certificate was issued not in accordance with
[00:03:04] the procedures in Permendikbud
[00:03:07] 292014. For example, out of the seven conditions that
[00:03:11] were required, A to G, it turned out that four conditions were not
[00:03:14] included. That is in the legal consideration. Now, in
[00:03:19] rejected, because there was a fact this context, it becomes something that
[00:03:22] is reasonable. Then, when the discussion is
[00:03:26] about basing it on fulfilling education requirements,
[00:03:30] the court itself states that the education requirement document
[00:03:33] does not meet the requirements
[00:03:36] as a document needed for nomination. So in
[00:03:39] this context, what the petitioner
[00:03:43] questioned was proven, right?
[00:03:46] By the court, regardless of whether we agree with the court or not,
[00:03:49] Mas Adi also mentioned
[00:03:52] we have to read it completely, right? What that we must follow decision 90, right? Although
[00:03:55] we all understand
[00:03:58] the contract, the version
[00:04:01] benefits and who is harmed? Of course, those behind that decision. Now, regarding the Constitutional Court's decision on the absence of a diploma, this
[00:04:05] means that it also becomes a court decision that
[00:04:09] was then examined with an open and transparent examination. There were
[00:04:13] administratively flawed requirements that were
[00:04:16] obtained or then given not in accordance with
[00:04:19] the provisions, and that was what the Constitutional Court said. Okay, let's move on to
[00:04:23] Pak Hozi regarding the evidence submitted to the investigator at the time of the criminal investigation. What was it,
[00:04:27] Pak Hozi? Yes, first, the object that we suspected.
[00:04:38] And because this is a certificate used by Gibran, the suspects we reported,
[00:04:41] we suspect that the first one who issued it was the Ministry of Education and Culture,
[00:04:45] and the second one who used it, again, so we cannot
[00:04:48] narrate that the person who used it is not wrong because they don't have the same product.
[00:04:52] It's not like if there was smuggling, Gibran was not the one
[00:04:55] who smuggled it, but he was the one who benefited from the
[00:04:58] new regulation. As for Hasim's clarification, it becomes meaningless, because
[00:05:02] previously in the trial he claimed that Article 18 paragraph 3
[00:05:06] was a proposal from the Ministry of Education and Culture. In fact, at the same
[00:05:09] time in the trial, the Ministry of Education also denied
[00:05:13] that, meaning that authoritatively,
[00:05:16] Hasim's statement has no value to legitimize that there was no
[00:05:20] smuggling of articles. In fact, this further strengthens that there were indeed
[00:05:23] other parties who provided those articles so that Gibran could pass smoothly,
[00:05:27] while Gibran's position was only to take advantage of it, exactly like
[00:05:30] decision 90. It was Almasaikiru who sued.
[00:05:33] Gibran was not involved, but he benefited from it. He
[00:05:37] took advantage of that loophole, even though it was then stated
[00:05:40] that the judges violated ethics. And in fact, Mbak Titi just said that
[00:05:44] there has also been a correction that even if it's a public office,
[00:05:47] it can't be a mayor, at least a governor. Right? But I want to focus on
[00:05:51] something that actually needs to be proven, not just by the
[00:05:55] parties. Yesterday, the one who had the most interest was Gibran,
[00:05:58] because the related party should have been Gibran himself, and it was also proven that the parties
[00:06:02] who were present as if representing Gibran were also declared by the Constitutional Court
[00:06:06] to have no legal standing. What does that mean?
[00:06:09] It's not over yet, even though we say
[00:06:13] we accept it. Precisely because these parties accept the Constitutional Court's decision,
[00:06:18] are followed up to Paris, some to PTUN, which has been ongoing,
[00:06:22] and today some are going to the DPRRI. I think
[00:06:26] if we really understand our country and it's a country of law, then
[00:06:29] in my opinion, Gibran's camp is the camp that should benefit
[00:06:33] because there is a process where Gibran can
[00:06:36] prove that what is in the Constitutional Court is, let's say,
[00:06:40] wrong, let's say that. But for us, this is also an opportunity
[00:06:43] to prove that what was decided by the Constitutional Court is already final and binding
[00:06:47] and needs follow-up, and the follow-up mechanism is through impeachment.
[00:06:51] Okay, so Mas Adipray, who benefits the most if this polemic
[00:06:55] continues to drag on and also continues to roll? But hold on to Mas's answer. Let's
[00:06:59] follow this first.
[00:07:11] Food self-sufficiency is one of the foundations of a nation's defense
[00:07:15] strength, and what is the potential in the coming years?
[00:07:18] The Red and White Village Cooperative is
[00:07:21] not a supermarket. All subsidized aid,
[00:07:25] rice aid, food, tractor aid for
[00:08:08] the discussion. Mas Adi, who benefits the most
[00:08:10] from this polemic if it is allowed to continue to drag on or roll like
[00:08:14] this? I initially suspected that after the Constitutional Court's decision,
[00:08:18] it was a win-win, right? So all parties were happy
[00:08:21] and accepted it. From Deni
[00:08:25] Indrayana's camp and Rafle Halun's, they considered that even though
[00:08:28] their lawsuit for disqualification was
[00:08:32] revealed about the diploma that was deemed not equivalent, they accepted it enough.
[00:08:36] Likewise, from Mas Gibran's supporters,
[00:08:39] even Bung Andian prostrated in gratitude. I thought it was over.
[00:08:43] The matter was settled. They accepted the Constitutional Court's decision as a whole. But
[00:08:47] in its development, because there is still rejection that
[00:08:50] the Constitutional Court is considered not clear in making this decision, I
[00:08:53] assume that Mas Gibran's supporters
[00:08:57] accept it in part and reject it in part too. They accept it
[00:09:00] because he was not disqualified. They reject
[00:09:03] the Constitutional Court's decision that there was no convincing evidence
[00:09:06] related to the equivalence of the diploma. That's what is
[00:09:10] a long narrative. Then who
[00:09:14] who benefit are the parties who believe
[00:09:17] that Mas Gibran does not have a diploma equivalent to
[00:09:21] high school. That's what then becomes a kind of ammunition,
[00:09:25] for example, coming to the DPR to make a right of inquiry and
[00:09:29] so on and so forth to validate that
[00:09:32] the process of requirements related to the vice presidential candidate in
[00:09:35] 2024 is not valid and illegal, and that is linked
[00:09:39] to the possibility in 2029 if he doesn't
[00:09:42] take Package C. Roughly speaking, then Mas Gibran will be
[00:09:45] questioned for his candidacy if he wants to run in
[00:09:48] 2029. Even so, we also cannot
[00:09:51] be sure that getting a ticket to run in 2029 is not
[00:09:55] an easy matter. And at the same time, of course, the one who is harmed is
[00:09:59] Mas Gibran's side with Bung Bil. Why is he harmed? Because
[00:10:02] the effect of the Constitutional Court's decision is not just a political
[00:10:05] effect. Attacks asking him to
[00:10:08] resign, some even took down Mas's photo.
[00:10:12] Appreciated by the Sukabumi DPRD, not just
[00:10:15] that, but it's a long road to 2029
[00:10:19] if Mas Gibran wants to run and, for example, also gets
[00:10:22] a ticket, then the issue of the minimum requirement
[00:10:25] equivalent to high school must be met, whatever the title.
[00:10:29] That's what then becomes a long road that in many
[00:10:32] ways will be something that will certainly be a struggle for
[00:10:36] friends who support Gibran, because Gibran is always
[00:10:40] perceived as running in 2029. Even though I
[00:10:43] imagine it's quite complicated, let alone Gibran, people like Anies
[00:10:47] and perhaps other party leaders who are not too big to
[00:10:50] run in 2029. If the requirement to become a presidential candidate
[00:10:54] and vice presidential candidate is at least supported by two
[00:10:57] factions, that's a bit of a headache for me, especially for parties that
[00:11:01] are not affiliated with Gibran. So the harm is political
[00:11:04] and, of course, for the interests in 2029.
[00:11:08] That's why many parties say that instead of
[00:11:11] questioning the Constitutional Court's decision, if Mas
[00:11:15] Gibran and his supporters really want to run in 2029, then just
[00:11:19] resolve the issue, take Package C
[00:11:21] or prove if there is indeed evidence
[00:11:25] of graduation equivalent to high school. Where is the forum for
[00:11:28] proof? I don't know. That's why some say the forum for proving
[00:11:32] that Gibran has a diploma equivalent to high school is one of them
[00:11:35] in the political forum in the DPR using the right of inquiry so that it's clear
[00:11:39] and everyone knows who is wrong, what
[00:11:42] is wrong with the director general, what is wrong with the KPU, or if there is indeed no evidence
[00:11:46] of graduation. Because everyone claims their
[00:11:49] own, and the legitimate forum to judge who is
[00:11:52] wrong, who is right, who is fake, who is lying, as of today, of course,
[00:11:55] is in the DPR, politically. The process is legal, constitutional,
[00:11:59] and regulated by law. Mas Bil, respond. Yes, regarding
[00:12:02] profit and loss, actually both happen to Mas Gibran. But
[00:12:06] Bang Adi's analysis is very cool to me. But politically, Gibran's supporters
[00:12:10] also feel harmed, Mas Gibran. Eh, not really. In terms of
[00:12:14] performance, he is even more popular now, right? It's the same
[00:12:17] with Pak Jokowi. The more he is insulted and slandered,
[00:12:21] the more his great name rises, and currently,
[00:12:24] is still existing as a vice president. Tomorrow, he will be traveling
[00:12:28] around campuses, invited to several campuses. There will be thousands of students. It's up to
[00:12:32] them if someone shouts, "Where's the diploma?" That's normal. Mas
[00:12:35] Gibran has a principle like this: "You can insult me and my parents,
[00:12:39] slander us, but one thing, please don't insult and slander Pak Prabowo."
[00:12:43] That's Pak Gibran's commitment from the beginning. Now, for me,
[00:12:46] let's try to be honest again. If in the
[00:12:50] Constitutional Court's legal consideration, it's clear,
[00:12:53] Mbak, I've noticed carefully that what is substantively
[00:12:57] fulfilling is defined here as the requirements for a presidential
[00:13:00] candidate and vice presidential candidate. That goes back to the institution that has
[00:13:04] the authority in the law. I think it's the KPU because it's about
[00:13:07] candidate requirements. If in the context of impeachment or Article
[00:13:11] 7a and 7b, I think that's about
[00:13:14] not meeting the requirements as president and vice president, not
[00:13:18] as a candidate or president or vice presidential candidate.
[00:13:22] So the phrase "candidate" in the Constitutional Court's decision,
[00:13:25] for me, means that it goes back to the institution that has the authority regulated
[00:13:29] by law, namely the KPU. Now, the KPU has clearly stated,
[00:13:33] both in court and outside the forum, that Gibran
[00:13:37] has passed, he has passed according to the mechanism.
[00:13:40] His certificate is there, and he has gone through all the stages, so there is no doubt
[00:13:43] in it. I just hope that this certificate is clarified first.
[00:13:47] It can't be just from the Constitutional Court's legal consideration.
[00:13:51] We are waiting for friends from PTUN, for example, who are currently being sued.
[00:14:04] What you didn't accept before, please accept this now or what. But if it's package C,
[00:14:07] it's probably really bad, Mas. So, interpretation
[00:14:11] first. Let's talk about interpretation first before the UN. Yes, so once again,
[00:14:17] was stated that the court said that the authority
[00:14:20] lies with the institution that will assess it according to the 1945 Constitution.
[00:14:26] The Constitutional Court is, in the framework of election justice,
[00:14:30] positioned as the last resort for
[00:14:33] election justice, right? So it's the last port to seek
[00:14:37] election justice. Because it is the last port, it's
[00:14:41] impossible for it to return it to the party before the Constitutional Court,
[00:14:44] namely Bawaslu, KPU, or
[00:14:47] the election sentragakumdu, for example. Because it is the
[00:14:50] last one, then its limit, according to the Constitutional Court, is on
[00:14:54] page 375 of the decision, which is October
[00:14:57] 20, 2024, when he has the status
[00:15:00] of a candidate. If it is returned to the KPU, then his status
[00:15:04] is still as a candidate. Likewise, Bawaslu, because it
[00:15:08] is part of the election law enforcement
[00:15:11] mechanism. But because starting October 20, 2024,
[00:15:15] he is no longer a candidate, but an elected
[00:15:18] official, an elected position, then the issue of whether he still meets
[00:15:21] the requirements or not is in Article 7a. So
[00:15:25] that's why this position, in
[00:15:28] the context of us wanting to bring it to light,
[00:15:32] the existing forum, as Adi just said, the choice is
[00:15:35] whether it's a right of inquiry forum.
[00:15:47] No, and this also becomes a good public accountability mechanism. For example, if the inquiry
[00:15:50] forum or the right to state an opinion
[00:15:54] is proposed by 25 members of the DPR from more than
[00:15:58] one faction, then it is tried and attended
[00:16:01] by 2/3 of the DPR members. If indeed 2/3
[00:16:05] agrees, then it continues and... asks the Constitutional Court to
[00:16:09] decide. So the process is also not
[00:16:12] a short process, right? Because indeed, we are giving space
[00:16:16] to the president and vice president to be protected during their
[00:16:20] term of office, and there's no need to worry about that.
[00:16:22] In fact, this space is what can
[00:16:25] stop spaces outside formal mechanisms. Right now,
[00:16:29] we're just busy fighting, right? I mean, not fighting, having different opinions,
[00:16:33] deliberating. This is the view regarding the domain of
[00:16:36] 7a, 7b. This is the domain of 22e. But
[00:16:40] who will make the final decision? The right
[00:16:43] one is if the process starts from the good. Pak
[00:16:46] Hozi, yes, if there were no
[00:16:49] disputes and no differences of opinion in this matter, then of course the authority that issued
[00:16:53] the certificate would be the reference, in this case, the KPU. But the problem is that this has already
[00:16:57] entered the judicial institution, namely the Constitutional Court, and the Constitutional Court
[00:17:00] states that this is the authority of another institution, and if we
[00:17:03] focus on the context of the Constitutional Court's consistency, then there is indeed
[00:17:07] but political trial through the DPR, because the DPR, in addition to
[00:17:10] being a legislative body, when it exercises its oversight
[00:17:13] function, it is actually a political judicial body,
[00:17:16] and this is indeed related to political
[00:17:20] office, and the issues are political requirements, so
[00:17:24] it is indeed the DPR. However, I what
[00:17:27] prefer is HMP, because the process has started with
[00:17:30] the Constitutional Court's decision, which has clearly shown what
[00:17:33] the issues are. Now, it just needs to be re-verified.
[00:17:37] And it's not over in the DPR either. At the end, it will still be
[00:17:41] authorized by the Constitutional Court's decision before finally going to
[00:17:44] the MPRRI with two main agendas, namely the impeachment of the vice president
[00:17:47] and also the election and appointment of the replacement
[00:17:50] vice president. But we have another perspective so that
[00:17:53] everyone also has a space as an analogy that if a civil
[00:17:57] servant commits a crime, it does not mean that the civil servant is fired
[00:18:00] and the crime is over. The suspected crime also continues because that is
[00:18:03] both from the side of the police to the competent court, which is the PTUN.
[00:18:07] Yes, from the criminal side, the court that has authority is the general court, and it starts with
[00:18:11] an investigation by the criminal investigation unit. From the side of political trial through
[00:18:15] inquiry or the right to state an opinion, that is the DPR. It is up to
[00:18:19] this nation to wait and see if the authoritative institution that has been given by
[00:18:22] the constitution works, because this is related to ethics, morals, and
[00:18:26] the integrity of our nation. If this issue is not resolved in our era,
[00:18:30] then it will become a bad historical legacy for the next
[00:18:33] generation. Okay, Mas Bil, which option do you think
[00:18:39] should be taken? But let's take a break first.
[00:20:03] the discussion. Now, Mas Bil, what option do you think
[00:20:07] Gibran will take to end this polemic? Earlier, Mas Adipran mentioned
[00:20:11] whether to pursue package C or
[00:20:14] prove it in the forum that is currently the most provable,
[00:20:18] which is in the DPR. For Mas Gibran, he is ready in any
[00:20:22] forum. Yesterday, in the Constitutional Court, because Mas Gibran felt that
[00:20:26] he did not commit any violations, then only the KPU and the
[00:20:29] petitioner conducted the
[00:20:32] trial. Meanwhile, the related parties were also organic, Mas
[00:20:36] Andi Azwaan and friends. There was no order from Mas Gibran, none. Everything
[00:20:40] ran its course. Now, after this, Mas Gibran firmly stated, "Oh
[00:20:43] yes, we will follow up." So, follow up here means whatever happens, whether
[00:20:47] in the criminal forum, in the political
[00:20:51] forum in the DPR, even perhaps other trials, including in Tun, please go ahead.
[00:20:55] We are not worried about anything. But what is clear is
[00:20:58] that we just ask, let's trace it. If we say that the petitioners yesterday
[00:21:02] asked for this to be substantively fair,
[00:21:05] removing procedural, then let's look at it fairly,
[00:21:09] substantively. Gibran, an Indonesian citizen who has the right to
[00:21:12] become a leader who can be elected and can vote in elections,
[00:21:16] including participating as a citizen. He follows the
[00:21:19] mechanism. He makes a certificate according
[00:21:22] to what is the need of that mechanism. He
[00:21:26] does not violate the rules, and the certificate is issued, accepted by the KPU.
[00:21:30] He did everything. There is nothing like what was said,
[00:21:33] manipulation, because he happens to be the president's son and so
[00:21:37] on. All of that must be proven. If Gibran is
[00:21:40] indeed someone who committed a violation, not just a procedure, even
[00:21:44] manipulation, let alone those who hate Mas Gibran, we ourselves will
[00:21:47] throw in the towel. I think that's good. Pak. When
[00:21:50] will this polemic, in your opinion, end, or what steps
[00:21:54] will be taken to end this polemic? I think it's quite difficult
[00:21:58] to say it will end if we don't have honesty, including
[00:22:01] our intention to end the polemic,
[00:22:04] even though it is not in our interest. For example,
[00:22:07] the initiative yesterday to the Constitutional Court. If Gibran understood that
[00:22:11] this nation needs an explanation and he, as the vice president,
[00:22:14] also needs to explain his position, it could actually be resolved
[00:22:17] if so. But the problem is that today,
[00:22:21] the issue cannot be as simple as desired
[00:22:24] because honesty is no longer present, and we also
[00:22:27] bring this issue not only by looking at the issue today
[00:22:31] but also the future of our nation. And if we talk
[00:22:35] about the narrative of the nation's children who need to be defended, it's not just Gibran
[00:22:38] but all citizens, including those who work
[00:22:42] hard to get an education through the right channels without
[00:22:45] equalization, and even if there is equalization from abroad, the object is also
[00:22:49] there. They also need to be given a place and justice
[00:22:52] so that it is not as if there is a different
[00:22:55] treatment due to certain factors.
[00:22:58] However, today I am challenging Gibran Rakabuming Raka
[00:23:02] that if he wants to resolve this national polemic,
[00:23:05] he should also help push for the process in the DPR
[00:23:09] to be rolled out. There is no need to delegitimize
[00:23:12] the process in the DPR with various arguments, because subjectively,
[00:23:15] he should be interested in that forum existing to show that
[00:23:19] he is not as suspected, let's say. However, at the same
[00:23:23] time, he must also be prepared if indeed the legal consequence is that he no longer
[00:23:26] meets the requirements and must be impeached. That means I do not
[00:23:29] agree to force people to resign. Don't. Just keep forcing it until
[00:23:33] there is proof. Don't let people be judged by public opinion and then
[00:23:36] resign. But at the time when this process is running, don't
[00:23:40] hinder it either, let alone narrate it as attacking the government,
[00:23:43] not moving on, the presidential election is still far away.
[00:23:47] No, we work according to the constitution. And when the constitution
[00:23:51] give space for that, let's respect it, okay I'll shift to Ms.
[00:23:54] Titi, Ms. Titi, if we want to get
[00:23:57] legal certainty, who is the most appropriate to provide certainty and
[00:24:01] what is the mechanism? Yes, the answer has actually been
[00:24:04] revealed by the constitutional court yes, namely
[00:24:07] the authorized institution according to the 1945
[00:24:10] constitution, and that authorized institution
[00:24:13] if we dissect our constitution it only exists within
[00:24:17] the realm of office regime, not election regime. because the election
[00:24:20] regime is over, that is, in the context of the office
[00:24:24] regime, the institutions in article
[00:24:27] 7a and 7b means he is talking about
[00:24:30] DPR with the rights that exist in the DPR, the option
[00:24:34] of rights that can be used whether the right of inquiry or the right to express
[00:24:38] opinion in revealing this problem, but more than that
[00:24:41] Ms. Rara, yes, there is also a problem that must be answered and it is
[00:24:45] no less important, namely the issue of the integrity of election organizers
[00:24:49] how. Our invitations are shown to be answered
[00:24:52] in different poles between KPU and Bawaslu,
[00:24:55] KPU claims for example that it received input from the ministry,
[00:24:59] but it turns out it did not, and Bawaslu states that they have
[00:25:02] a memorandum of objection that the rules in the KPU regulation
[00:25:06] contradict the law. This also needs to be revealed, therefore do not
[00:25:10] ignore the process that exists in DKP because we need
[00:25:13] to fix our election organizers. If our election organizers
[00:25:16] have problems, the ones who lose are not only the voters, but also
[00:25:20] the candidates. The candidates are affected by work that is, for example, not
[00:25:24] thorough, unprofessional or then intervened by other parties,
[00:25:28] okay, lastly to Mas Adi Pray, Mas Adi, all these paths
[00:25:31] continue to move, there is law, there is politics and there is also public
[00:25:35] opinion from all these paths, this process which is currently
[00:25:39] moving, which one should be watched out for in terms of process and also its impact,
[00:25:42] whether the result of the legal process or the polemic that never
[00:25:46] really dies later. If from
[00:25:48] a legal perspective, I think... "It's over, right? There's already a decision from the constitutional
[00:25:52] court." Okay, like it or not, protest or not,
[00:25:56] argue or not, it will not be able to change
[00:25:59] the constitutional court's decision. "Well, what is being discussed is there." What
[00:26:03] about the future regarding Mas Gibran, for example? Why am I talking
[00:26:06] about the package? If he has the intention and desire to run in
[00:26:10] 2029, if he uses the existing certificate, it will definitely
[00:26:13] be questioned because it is considered not equivalent to a high school
[00:26:17] diploma, so the next
[00:26:20] is considered equivalent to a high school diploma, at least there is a vague idea of
[00:26:24] Package C, but Package C is considered to downgrade
[00:26:28] the position of vice president, okay, don't use C, prove it
[00:26:31] from school. Back when he was in Singapore, there was proof
[00:26:34] of graduation, just bring that later if
[00:26:38] it's going to be used for candidacy in 2009.
[00:26:41] But it doesn't stop there, Rara, even if there is, for example, proof
[00:26:45] of graduation, it doesn't necessarily mean he'll get a party, right? That's how the story goes
[00:26:49] if linked to
[00:26:52] taken is quite winding and uphill actually.
[00:26:55] So why is it crowded today because many
[00:26:59] are saying that, "Oh, this Constitutional Court is considered to have overstepped
[00:27:02] its authority," something that also happened during the decision
[00:27:06] 90, the Constitutional Court is playing politics, this Constitutional Court is not clean
[00:27:09] in its decisions. I always say that, "Come on, don't
[00:27:13] ever curse the Constitutional Court because no matter what, like it or not, this has already
[00:27:16] become a black and white legal fact, final and binding."
[00:27:20] You want to write poems, you want to
[00:27:23] cry, argue, rally anywhere, it won't
[00:27:27] change anything. Now, what's interesting now that we're waiting for is
[00:27:30] the political process in the DPR.
[00:27:41] For example, the Director General is called, then the KPU is
[00:27:44] called. Now, one thing about the KPU,
[00:27:47] as far as I know, if factual verification related to candidacy, it
[00:27:51] usually goes through a quite detailed process. If I
[00:27:55] am nominated as a candidate, for example, if a candidate for governor
[00:27:58] of Madura is investigated, my school at UIN in Depok...
[00:28:11] That is considered valid proof. Tomorrow, it won't be like that, but
[00:28:14] usually, the matter of candidacy has a plenary session, "Oh, this one passed
[00:28:18] administratively," then it's factually examined one by one, and that
[00:28:22] didn't happen, so it's natural if then the proof of the candidacy
[00:28:25] requirements, if we return it to the KPU, people don't trust
[00:28:29] the KPU anymore. The problem is this regime is the same as before. Let's just wait
[00:28:33] for how the next chapter of the Gibran diploma polemic unfolds. Thank
[00:28:36] you, Mas Bil, Mas Adiprai, Ms. Titi, and also Mr. Uzi for discussing with us in
[00:28:40] this topic for today. Viewers, the decision has been read, but
[00:28:43] the questions have not been fully answered, because in the end, this
[00:28:47] is not just about a piece of diploma or who is right and who is
[00:28:51] wrong. This is about trust in
[00:28:54] a process that must be open, in rules that must apply
[00:28:58] equally, and in a state that must be able to provide certainty due to
[00:29:01] its position.
[00:29:33] Metro Siang every day live at 11
[00:29:35] AM
[00:29:38] a taste that is definitely champion, now
[00:29:41] more intense, intense moments, intense
[00:29:44] aroma, intense freshness, intense
[00:29:48] taste, champion, intense, champion your