The simultaneous regional elections scheduled for Nov. 27 represent democratic progress in efforts to increase cost efficiency, create political stability, and improve development planning.
With the terms of the president and House of Representatives at the national level nearly synchronized with the terms of regional leaders, the structuring of simultaneous elections ensures more connected development planning.
“It’s different if regional elections are held at different times. For example, if the president has already been in office for three years, and a new governor is elected, the governor would have to adapt to the central government’s programs again,” said Dr. Yance Arizona, a lecturer from the Department of Constitutional Law at the UGM Faculty of Law (FH UGM).
“And then, if there’s a new election after four years, there would be more adjustments. This would disrupt development stability.”
He explained that the current model, in which national and regional elections are held close together in the same year, is actually the ideal solution.
This synchronization allows for smoother coordination between central and regional governments, ensuring that development plans are more connected and less likely to be disrupted by frequent leadership transitions.
Dr. Arizona made these remarks during a journalist workshop on Thursday (Nov. 7) at the Fortakgama Room.
The researcher from the UGM Center for Democracy, Constitution, and Human Rights Studies (Pandekha) identified 12 risk issues for this year’s elections.
One of the most significant risks commonly faced during regional elections is the neutrality of civil servants (ASN) and election organizers and the proliferation of money politics.
Dr. Arizona views money politics as the starting point of corruption. Candidates often make substantial financial investments even before the election begins, which means that once elected, they will likely seek ways to recover their money.
“A transactional process then occurs in the context of electoral democracy in Indonesia. We wouldn’t have imagined this initially, but that’s what has happened, and many regional leaders have been caught up in corruption,” he said.
Even though simultaneous regional elections are considered a step forward for democracy post-1998 reform, Dr. Arizona argued that it’s possible that in future elections, the public may no longer directly elect their leaders, and the process could be returned to the legislative bodies.
This is because there is no explicit constitutional requirement for direct elections. Article 18, paragraph 4 of the constitution states that governors, regents, and mayors are to be elected democratically.
“The current democratic process is interpreted as direct elections. However, it could also be non-direct, and non-direct elections can still be democratic. For instance, leaders could be elected by members of the legislative bodies, and that would still be considered democratic,” he explained.
Author: Agung Nugroho
Post-editor: Afifudin Baliya
Photographer: Donnie