The Movement To Stab Three Paslons Is A Form Of Disappointment Because The Champion Fails To Advance In The 2024 Jakarta Pilkada

Central Jakarta City General Election Commission (KPU) employees socialize the 2024 Pilkada on Motor Vehicle Free Day (HBKB) Sudirman, Jakarta, Sunday (8/9/2024). (ANTARA/Muhammad Iqbal/agr)

JAKARTA Social media is enlivened by the movement of'sons and children stab 3 candidate pairs' or pairs of candidates in the election of regional heads or the Jakarta Regional Head Election. Political observers consider this movement to appear as a form of disappointment by some residents because it was not true for Anies Baswedan in the 2024 Jakarta Pilkada.

This movement is reportedly initiated by Abah's son, the nickname for Anies Baswedan's supporters. The three candidate pairs' stabbing movement was widely discussed on social media. He allegedly, this happened because of the disappointment of Abah's son after his champion failed to advance in the Jakarta Pilkada.

Previously, the name Anies Baswedan was intensively reported to be running again in the election for governor and deputy governor of Jakarta. However, the plan was canceled because the three supporting parties, namely PKS, the NasDem Party, and PKB returned to their bodies and chose to join the Advanced Indonesia Coalition (KIM) Plus to carry Ridwan Kamil-Suswono.

The hope of Anak Abah seeing their champion running for the PDI-P (PDIP) also ran aground. There are a number of reasons why the party bearing the white-nosed bull symbol failed to carry Anies and instead announced the Pramono Anung-Rano Karno pair for the Jakarta Pilkada. One of them, because PDIP wants to maintain good relations with the Palace.

This three-paslon stabbing movement invites voters in Jakarta to vote for three boxes at once. To note, the Jakarta Pilkada almost certainly presents three pairs of candidates, namely Pramono Anung-Rano Karno, Ridwan Kamil-Suswono, and the independent pair Dharma Pongrekun-Kun Wardhana.

Political Communication Analyst and founder of the KedaiKOPI Survey Institute Hendri Satrio said this movement illustrates the disappointment of some Jakarta residents.

"Yes, this movement actually describes the disappointment of some Jakarta residents whose heroes failed to participate in the election. It's okay, his name is also an attempt to voice his voice, it's okay," said the man who is familiarly called Hensat to VOI.

Furthermore, Hendri also predicts several possibilities related to where the votes of Anies Baswedan's supporters will go in the Jakarta Pilkada. According to him, there are three possibilities for Anies' voice to be anchored. First, channeled to one of the candidate pairs, either to Ridwan Kamil, Rano Karno, or Dharma Pongrekun. The second possibility is not distributed at all, the third possibility is distributed but all candidates are nominated.

"But if you are told to choose between these three candidates, the votes of Anies supporters seem like they are not going to Ridwan Kamil, maybe to Rano Karno," said Hensat.

Because Ridwan Kamil's impression is too Jokowi. If the impression is Prabowo, the father's son still wants to choose, but if Jokowi is far away because he is considered the cause of Anies' failure to advance, he perceives that," he added.

Meanwhile, according to election law teachers from the University of Indonesia, Titi Anggraini, said that the three candidate pairs' stabbing movements emerged because of the practice of buying political party tickets and causing a decision on the aspirations of the nominations in the 2024 Pilkada.

According to Titi, the public can directly feel the result of the decision on the aspirations of the candidacy so that it creates expressions of dissatisfaction with the movement to vote for all candidate candidate pairs.

He said that one of the decisions on aspirations was reflected in the Jakarta Pilkada.

In Jakarta there are Anies Baswedan and Ahok (Basuki Tjahaja Purnama).Kok yang dicalonkan lain? Moreover, it is imported from the governor of the province next door. Well, that's the problem," he said in a webinar discussion held by The Constitutional Democracy Initative or CONSID.

Can the call or invitation to stab the three candidate pairs be criminalized? Advocacy and study institute that focuses on reforming the criminal and legal justice system, the Institute for Criminal Justice Reform (ICJR), assesses that many people think that Golput is something that is not justified and violates the law. In fact, whether choosing or not to vote, both of them are part of the political rights of citizens.

This is guaranteed in Article 28 of the 1945 Constitution, every independent citizen to associate and gather, issue thoughts orally and in writing and so on. One form of derivative, among others, is the right to state his political choices in general elections or elections.

According to ICJR, there are at least two views that can be related to the attitude of the goalkeeper. First, choosing in essence is a right that can be used or is not used. So golput can be interpreted as the choice of someone who does not use their rights.

"Second, referring to the provisions of the 1945 Constitution, golput is defined as part of the right of citizens to express their thoughts," said ICJR on its official website.

However, Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning General Elections (UU Pemilu) does not prohibit Golput. However, it turns out that it invites Golput to be punished. This happens if there are criminal elements when inviting or campaigning for the Golput movement, as explained in Article 515.

"Everyone who deliberately promises or gives money or other material to voters so as not to exercise their voting rights or choose certain election participants or exercise their voting rights in certain ways so that their ballots are invalid, shall be punished with imprisonment for a maximum of 3 (three) years and a maximum fine of Rp36,000,000 (twenty-six million rupiah)," reads the article.

According to ICJR, based on the formulation of this article, a person or a group of people can be punished if there is an element 'deliberately at the time of voting promising or giving money or other material to voters'. That way, without an appointment or giving some money or material, the act of simply moving people to abstain cannot be punished.