Electoral Challenges in Indonesia

By: Masykurudin Hafidz, National Coordinator of the People’s Voter Education Network (JPPR)

SURAU.CO – As the world’s largest democratic Muslim country, Indonesia has made significant strides in its electoral processes. However, a closer look reveals persistent electoral challenges in Indonesia that require immediate attention. The fall of Soeharto in 1998 sparked the Reform movement, leading to significant constitutional amendments. For the first time, these changes inserted the concept of ‘election’ into the constitution. Consequently, this new framework shifted the selection of the president and regional heads to direct elections and also created an independent election management body (EMB).

Unfortunately, Indonesia enacted fourteen separate electoral laws in just fifteen years. This rapid and fragmented law-making has, in turn, caused major complexities. As a result, the country now suffers from inconsistent application of laws, overlapping authority, and a complicated law enforcement process. This chapter, therefore, discusses these electoral challenges in Indonesia by examining its legal framework, institutional obstacles, and specific areas of electoral management that need improvement.

A Complex and Fragmented Legal Framework

To begin with, the electoral challenges in Indonesia start with its numerous and often conflicting laws. Currently, a complex web of at least six separate statutes governs democratic representation. These laws cover everything from election management bodies to political parties and the structure of legislatures (MD3 Law). Authorities often review and update these laws separately for each election cycle. Moreover, short-term political factors, rather than a holistic need for improvement, heavily influence this process. This approach inevitably creates internal inconsistencies, legal uncertainty, and loopholes that the EMB must navigate. Key problems include contradictory provisions, overlapping authority between agencies, and inconsistent punishments for violations.

Institutional Flaws and Overlapping Authority

In addition to legal fragmentation, Indonesia’s electoral framework is unique in its institutional design. While it uses an independent model, legal reforms have created a complex structure. The country’s election organizers consist of the General Elections Commission (KPU) and the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu). Although the law intends for them to function as a unified entity, they remain separate bodies. The KPU conducts elections, while Bawaslu oversees their implementation. This dual structure, combined with the ad hoc status of lower-level committees, can create systemic overlapping authority and significant coordination challenges. Adding to this complexity is the Constitutional Court, which has the final say in resolving election disputes. While this provides a check and balance, the overall institutional design remains fragmented.

Major Electoral Challenges in Practice

Beyond legal and institutional flaws, Indonesia’s elections face numerous practical challenges on the ground. These issues directly impact the quality and fairness of the democratic process.

1. Political Clientelism and Dynasties

First, a strong culture of political clientelism has fueled the rise of political dynasties. In this system, leaders often regard the public sector as personal property. They prioritize loyalty over competence, turning democracy into a mechanism to legitimize the power of local bosses. To win office, for example, parties increasingly support candidates backed by incumbent regimes or those with strong family ties to political elites.

2. Money Politics and Campaign Finance

Next, money politics has become increasingly intrusive. For instance, monitoring by Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW) showed that candidates massively committed violations during the 2014 elections. These violations included vote-buying and misusing government facilities. Furthermore, the lack of strict spending limits and poor compliance in financial reporting create an unlevel playing field.

3. Inaccurate Voter Registration

Inaccurate voter registration also remains a persistent problem. Despite an online system (Sidalih), issues like name duplication and the inclusion of deceased voters are common. An inaccurate voter list often disenfranchises eligible citizens. Moreover, it can become a tool for committing fraud.

4. Opaque Vote Counting Processes

The challenge with vote counting is not the process at the polling station itself. Instead, the problem lies in the vulnerability to fraud during the multi-tiered recapitulation process that follows. There have been many attempts by candidates to manipulate vote counts during this tabulation. Therefore, a more transparent process is urgently needed.

5. Flawed Political Party Registration

The rules for party registration also pose a challenge. Loopholes still allow many small or not-so-serious parties to participate. This, in turn, creates confusion for voters and complicates coalition-building. The system clearly needs reform to ensure that only parties with a real supporter base can compete.

6. Deficiencies of the Open-List Electoral System

In addition, Indonesia’s open-list electoral system has created new problems. While it reduces party oligarchy, it has also intensified competition between candidates. This has led to a massive increase in money politics and has weakened the role of political parties.

7. Unequal Media Access

Finally, unequal media access remains a significant issue. Media outlets owned by political figures often support their own candidates. This practice creates an unfair advantage, as parties without media ownership must pay for advertising, while others receive extensive, biased coverage for free.

Prospects and Recommendations for Reform

Despite these issues, there are active efforts to push for reform. To overcome these electoral challenges in Indonesia, a comprehensive approach is necessary. First and foremost, the government must codify all election laws into a single, understandable legal framework. Such a move will create synergy and reduce contradictions. Furthermore, this new legal structure must ensure that vote counting is accurate, fair, and transparent.

Ultimately, while the open-list proportional system has flaws, it remains a better option than the closed-list system of the past. The key, therefore, is to improve it. This can be done by strengthening campaign finance regulations, ensuring post-election accountability, and fostering internal party democracy. Strengthening the electorate through better laws and robust enforcement is the only way to recruit accountable public officials and build a healthier democracy in Indonesia.