JAKARTA - A number of survey institutions in Indonesia support the discourse on indirect regional head elections (pilkada) through the DPRD which is currently being widely discussed.
Political observer of the Citra Institute, Yusak Farchan, assessed the high cost of politics in the election as a serious problem in Indonesian democracy. According to him, the high cost since the nomination stage makes many candidates have spent a lot of money, but not necessarily able to advance in the contest.
"Because the journey of the election has been direct since 2005 until now, it has shown a high political cost. If we open the stages, there are four crucial stages that will inevitably make candidates spend a lot of money," said Yusak in his statement, Sunday, February 15.
Yusak explained that the heavy burden had emerged since the candidacy process in political parties. Candidates must prepare a not insignificant cost just to get party support, especially if they have to form a coalition with many parties.
"One party alone, if the 'safe' standard is Rp300-Rp500 million, and there are many parties, it is already very big. The next stage is the campaign. The area is wide, the candidates cannot reach everything in the usual ways. That's why money politics emerged," he said.
In a survey that his agency had conducted, Yusak explained that the most popular campaign method for the public was the "direct candidate". However, the limited campaign time made the candidate unable to reach all constituents. Finally, the candidate chose an instant way with money politics in order to get votes from the public who had not been met.
"Not to mention the stage of buying votes. In some areas, one vote can be very expensive. If it is totaled, the cost of becoming a mayor or regent can reach tens of billions," he said.
Meanwhile, the Director of Indonesia Political Review (IPR) Iwan Setiawan assessed that the discourse to change the election into an indirect one was indeed often associated with the reason for budget efficiency. Through the change of the system into an indirect election, according to Iwan, there will be many election processes that will be cut and make the budget more efficient.
"If we talk about efficiency, the advantage of the election through the DPRD will cut down on many processes, especially the cost of direct elections," said Iwan.
He said that the direct election budget was indeed large because it involved all people as voters. Based on the allocation of the 2024 general budget, the funds prepared for the election reached tens of trillions of rupiah. "If we look at the allocation of the 2024 general budget, there is around Rp. 38.2 trillion that is budgeted for direct elections," he said.
However, he reminded, if the election is handed back to the DPRD, democracy has the potential to regress to an old pattern that is more elitist and prone to political transactions, so that direct elections remain the choice that is more in line with the spirit of reform.
In the same vein, Director of Indonesia Political Opinion (IPO) Dedi Kurnia Syah said that democracy cannot be narrowed down to the meaning of only direct elections by the people. According to him, in the Indonesian constitution there is no single norm that explicitly requires regional heads to be directly elected by voters.
"The law only mentions that the election of regional heads is carried out democratically. Democracy is not synonymous and does not always have to be interpreted as a direct election," said Dedi.
Dedi explained that the representative system through the DPRD still has democratic legitimacy because DPRD members are first directly elected by the people through legislative elections. In that way, the public mandate has actually been given to the regional parliament to make strategic decisions, including determining the regional head.
"In simple terms, the people have handed over their mandate to the DPRD. So when the DPRD chooses the head of the region, it is still part of the implementation of democracy," he said.
Furthermore, Dedi assessed that direct elections had given birth to many serious problems, especially the high cost of politics which led to corruption practices. The urge to return the campaign capital often became a trigger for regional heads to be entangled in hand-in-hand operations (OTT).
"The problem is not just about being directly elected or not, but the very expensive political costs. From there comes the push for capital return, and that is one of the roots of corruption in the region," said Dedi.
In addition, Dedi said, electoral democracy that emphasizes direct elections has shifted to an arena of mobilization and social conflict. According to him, the impact of direct Pilkada does not stop at political results, but spreads to the social relations of citizens.
"What is most felt from the direct pilkada is not only about political costs, but polarization in society. Horizontal conflicts arise, social relations are damaged, and this continues to repeat every election cycle," said Dedi.
He assessed that the interpretation of democracy, which is always equated with direct elections, ignores the essence of the Pancasila democracy which emphasizes deliberation and representation. In the context of Indonesia which is heterogeneous, the representative mechanism is considered more capable of calming social tensions. "Democracy does not have to always be noisy in society. In the representative system, political conflicts return to the elite room, not drawn to the kitchen of the residents," said Dedi.
According to Dedi, the experience of direct pilkada for almost two decades shows that open contests are often accompanied by negative campaigns, identity politics, and mobilization based on primordial sentiments. This condition makes the community sharply divided, even after the election is over.
The English, Chinese, Japanese, Arabic, and French versions are automatically generated by the AI. So there may still be inaccuracies in translating, please always see Indonesian as our main language. (system supported by DigitalSiber.id)
