Jakarta. The ongoing legal motions by two defeated presidential candidates seeking to disqualify president-elect Prabowo Subianto and his running mate Gibran Rakabuming Raka are essentially challenging a ruling issued by the same court where the motion will be tried, state administrative law expert Yusril Ihza Mahendra said on Sunday.

The rival candidates are disputing the election results based on an argument that Gibran’s candidacy was unlawful due to the controversial Constitutional Court ruling that amended the minimum age requirement of 40 years old.

Gibran, 37, became eligible to contest after the court made an exception for candidates who have served or are serving in elected public office. The eldest son of President Joko Widodo was elected as the mayor of Solo three years ago.

The ruling sparked controversy because it was issued by a panel presided over by Constitutional Court Chief Justice Anwar Usman, who is the president’s brother-in-law. A subsequent ethics tribunal found Anwar to have violated ethics, prompting the appointment of a new chief justice.

However, the controversial ruling stands, and Gibran’s candidacy was approved by the General Election Commission (KPU) in October.

Defeated presidential candidates Anies Baswedan and Ganjar Pranowo demanded a revote, citing the controversial legal circumstances behind Gibran’s candidacy, in a motion to the Constitutional Court -- the only authorized body to try election disputes.

Yusril, who leads Prabowo’s legal team, said the motion amounts to asking the court to repeal its own ruling.

"If they dispute Mr. Gibran’s candidacy due to the Constitutional Court ruling, they are not actually regarding the KPU and [Prabowo] as the defendants. They are challenging the Constitutional Court head-on," Yusril said.

If Anies and Ganjar objected to last year’s controversial ruling, they should have brought the case to the Election Oversight Body (Bawaslu) or the State Administrative Court before the election, he added.

“As far as I’m concerned, neither of the plaintiffs have ever done that,” Yusril said.

The former justice minister further explained that disputes on administrative procedures are separate matters from ones on presidential election results. The former should be tried by the State Administrative Court, while the latter falls within the domain of the Constitutional Court.

Yusril said disputing administrative procedures after the election is simply too late. Additionally, Anies and Baswedan have essentially agreed to contest the election alongside Prabowo and Gibran.

"However, after losing the election, they are demanding the Constitutional Court to disqualify Mr. Gibran. This is absurd and inconsistent. We believe that the Constitutional Court is fully aware of its task, namely to try election disputes, not administrative procedures that fall under the purview of a different court,” Yusril said.

According to him, it’s also impossible for the Constitutional Court to order a revote.

“If Mr. Gibran is to be disqualified, the presidential election must be reset to the very beginning, from the selection of presidential and vice-presidential candidates. The redo election cannot be held partially but must take place nationwide," Yusril said.

Prabowo and Gibran were officially declared election winners with 58 percent of the vote on March 20.