In politics, criticism is an inherent element of the democratic fabric. On Feb. 11, 2024, the release of the film “Dirty Vote” made waves, amassing six million views on its debut day.
This two-hour documentary featured insights from three constitutional law mavens, including Dr. Zainal Arifin Mochtar, an esteemed UGM legal faculty figure.
Dr. Mochtar shed light on the meticulous process behind the film’s creation during Tuesday’s discourse at the UGM Faculty of Social and Political Sciences (Feb. 13).
“Initially, we delved into election research, and then Dhandy [an individual involved in the film’s production] expressed interest in crafting a film based on our findings. He proposed involving the three of us in it. Our research was reexamined before being made into a film, and then we debated it,” Dr. Mochtar recounted.
Given the volatile nature of political subjects, the filmmaking journey demanded utmost caution, mindful of the potential public reactions. Indeed, “Dirty Vote” has stirred a potpourri of responses and controversies among audiences.
In essence, “Dirty Vote” unveils the findings of election fraud research spanning several years. The documentary, spearheaded by legal luminaries Feri Amsari from Andalas University, Bivitri Susanti from the Center for Law and Policy Studies, and Zainal Arifin Mochtar from UGM, meticulously dissects pre-election political phenomena.
Over 117 minutes, viewers are confronted with systemic issues ranging from governmental impartiality to budget allocation discrepancies and ethical transgressions.
Dr. Mochtar elucidated the challenges encountered during the film’s production, emphasizing, “This isn’t Dhandy’s inaugural film endeavor; our behind-the-scenes team was well aware of the potential repercussions. However, we didn’t receive backing from any quarters throughout this undertaking.”
“If we had received support, we wouldn’t have faced financial hurdles. The accusations have been arduous to navigate, and financial reports remain unpaid even now. Any insinuation of candidate influence is unfounded.”
In his view, electoral malpractice is an age-old issue within democracies. Breaches of democratic principles, conflicts of interest, and electoral deceit are commonplace. Such entrenched challenges arise within a system that can no longer contain its fissures.
Hence, the significance of critiques like “Dirty Vote” echoes similar sentiments from preceding years. This film doesn’t merely critique; it enlightens the populace, empowering them in their civic duty of voting.
“Before entering the film production phase, we scrutinized our research findings rigorously. Weak or unconvincing evidence was omitted. We found that there was little novelty. Fraud is systematic, and our task was to weave together disparate strands,” Dr. Mochtar elaborated.
He admitted that this process dwarfed filmmaking’s technical aspects in complexity and duration.
Dean of UGM’s Faculty of Social and Political Sciences, Dr. Wawan Mas’udi, underscored the film’s pivotal role in the democratic landscape. No democracy is flawless; it’s a continuum of trial and error.
Criticism and opinions serve as catalysts for systemic improvement. Regrettably, not all critiques find resonance or acceptance. Dean Mas’udi hailed “Dirty Vote” not only as a critique but also as a testament to the electoral climate of the year.
“Democracy is a journey spanning years. No election unfolds flawlessly, yet our society often forgets history. It’s imperative to recall historical events and processes. Hence, this film serves as a reminder and a blueprint for future democratic endeavors,” the dean concluded.
Author: Tasya