On the other hand, the witness mentioned that in Pante Bidari Subdistrict, PNA's votes should have been 582 votes based on C-Results, but in D-Results it became 538 votes. The witness also mentioned that the mandate witness in Pante Bidari from PNA had been given the mandate to file an objection, but the witness did not carry out the mandate and did not file an objection/rebuttal. "I have conveyed to the mandate witness from PNA at the sub-district level to file a rebuttal, but the PNA mandate witness was not trustworthy so he did not file a rebuttal," said M. Ikrar.

KPU Witness, Budi Mirza, mentioned that he did not know or forgot about the PPP and PNA vote acquisition in C-Results, while only knowing D-Results. "I forgot Your Honor C-Results, there are D-Results," he said. Meanwhile, KPU witness, Marwan, mentioned that there were no problems during the recapitulation, but the PNA witness did not sign. "PNA did not sign, but there were no objections from the witness, Your Honor," he said.

In Madat Subdistrict, KPU Witness, Amiruddin, mentioned that C-Plano had been displayed during the recapitulation in Madat Subdistrict, all witnesses including witnesses from PNA and PPP signed and there were no objections. "Everyone signed and there were no objections, Your Honor," he said. In Simpang Ulim Subdistrict, KPU Witness, Abu Bakar, stated that the recapitulation had been carried out in accordance with the provisions. "We have carried out all stages in accordance with the provisions," he said.

PPP, which is also a related party in this case, presented witness Mukhlis, who was a witness at TPS Madat 4 and Madat Subdistrict. He explained that PPP's votes in Madat Subdistrict were 252 votes, while at TPS Madat 4 he did not get any votes. "PPP's votes in Madat Subdistrict were 252, while at my TPS it was zero votes," he said. Furthermore, Mukhlis mentioned that PNA and PPP had also signed and approved the recapitulation results at the Madat Subdistrict level and the PPK had given time for the witnesses to carry out checks.

The related party also presented Zamzami, a KPPS officer in Pante Rambong Village. The witness explained that there were no problems and no objections. "I am a KPPS officer in Pante Rambong Village, there are no problems and no objections, Your Honor," he said.

Previously, in the preliminary hearing, the Applicant claimed that there were differences in the number of votes between himself and the United Development Party (PPP) according to the Applicant's and Respondent's versions. Based on the arguments presented, the Applicant requested the Court to grant all of the Applicant's requests, annul the General Election Commission Decree Number 360 of 2024, and order the General Election Commission to conduct a recount of ballots in Pante Bidari Subdistrict, Madat Subdistrict, and Simpang Ulim Subdistrict in the Aceh Timur Electoral District 4, or determine the results of the vote acquisition deemed correct by the Applicant.