Survey Institutes Are Warned Not To Become Prostitution For Democracy Ahead Of The 2024 General Election

Illustration (Photo: Doc. Antara)

JAKARTA - The national survey institute has issued the results of a survey related to the electability of three pairs of presidential and vice presidential candidates.

Director of Deep Indonesia, Neni Nurhayati warned that survey institutions should not become prostitution of democracy ahead of the 2024 General Election.

This was conveyed by Neni in the MNC Trijaya Polemic discussion entitled 'Membagongkan Survey' which was broadcast online on Saturday, November 25.

"I, as a young person, issue a rather tendentious diction because this is also a'survey that is Barking', provocative as well," Neni said in his presentation, Saturday, November 25.

"So don't become a prostitution of democracy, because the survey institute should be able to work independently as a scientific worker in carrying out scientific calculations with applicable statistical methods," he continued.

Neni then mentioned the results of monitoring in the 2014 and 2019 elections. According to him, the survey agency was not serious in reporting to the KPU regarding the methodology and source of funding.

"When I monitored the 2014 or 2019 elections yesterday, it turned out that the survey agency was not serious about reports to the general election commission about the methodology, where did the sources of funds and so on come from," said Neni.

This, Neni continued, became an irregularity when the survey institute was not transparent and accountable.

Finally, he said, the public became of the opinion that survey institutions were indeed paid certain candidates to make their electability seem successful.

"This is not transparent and accountable so that it becomes a public sign. What is behind the survey agency? Don't really work just for the victory of certain candidates and this is certainly a problem when working with parties to conduct surveys," said Neni.

Neni also highlighted the funding of the survey institute which was not transparent and accountable. Especially when survey institutions do not want to convey research results and differences when published.

"So the matter of budget funding when reported to the KPU is not transparent and accountable and irrational when we check documents so it is not uncommon for survey institutions that do not want to convey where they come from, including the results of their research which are different from those published," explained Neni.

Neni added, by not being transparent and accountable, survey institutions, it becomes a serious problem.

Because, according to him, the survey results are one of the parameters of democracy that has quality and integrity.

"Of course it is a serious problem, I think even though one of the parameters of democracy that has quality and integrity has transparency and accountability, one of which is determined by how survey institutions in their funding," he concluded.