A General Election with Integrity

The disagreement between the General Elections Commission and the Elections Supervisory Agency on whether or not former corruption convicts can contest legislative elections at central and regional levels are seemingly much more than a contestation between the two bodies.

KOMPAS/ALIF ICHWAN

An officer of the General Elections Commission (KPU) arranges a nameplate bearing the Indonesian acronym for “presidential candidate” on Thursday (9/8/2018) at the KPU headquarters in Jakarta, ahead of the candidate registration for the 2019 presidential election.

The disagreement between the General Elections Commission (KPU) and the Elections Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) on whether or not former corruption convicts can contest legislative elections at central and regional levels are seemingly much more than a contestation between the two bodies. This disagreement may threaten the integrity of the general election on April 17 -- not only organizationally, but also results wise.

In line with KPU Regulation No. 20/2018, former convicts in cases relating to corruption, drug-related crimes and sexual assault against children are banned from contesting all legislative elections at central and regional levels. As the KPU is consistent with its ban, Bawaslu has thus far allowed former corruption convicts to register as legislative candidates. As of earlier this week, there have been 16 such candidates.

If Bawaslu and regional election supervisors end up “winning”, then our road towards achieving electoral integrity, including creating good governance, would be increasingly long and winding. It is clear that only through a general election with integrity can we elect public officials with integrity in our legislative bodies.

Consequently, if legislative candidates lacking in integrity are elected, they will become legislators lacking in integrity. Everyone knows that many officials elected through legislative or regional head elections lack integrity, resulting in them getting ensnared in cases of corruption, collusion, nepotism and abuse of power. Sooner or later, they end up being named as suspects by the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK).

There is seemingly a long road ahead for us to establish good governance. Integrity, transparency, accountability, effectiveness, participation and compliance to law and public order, the core characters of good governance, remain pipe dreams. The reason is clear: many elected public officials have failed to establish good governance; many are busy with acts that violate integrity.

Elections that regularly elect public officials will not be enough to consolidate democracy. Regular elections in 1999, 2004, 2009 and 2014, along with direct regional head elections since 2005, were all successfully organized. However, these alone were not enough; apart from upholding electoral integrity, elections should also produce public officials, in the executive and legislative branches of government, with unwavering integrity.

Moderate level

Thus far, many international institutions involved in strengthening global democracy have deemed Indonesian elections to be on a moderate level. Compared to other Southeast Asian countries, Indonesia is on top.

However, it still stagnates in consolidating its democracy for good governance, especially in terms of electoral and candidate integrity. Electoral integrity cannot be fully implemented as many candidates have track records of legal violations or committing integrity violations in the candidacy process, such as engaging in practices like voter buying. This has serious consequences in establishing good governance.

Conventionally, electoral integrity is closely linked to election organizing ethics for election-organizing bodies such as the KPU and Bawaslu. Electoral integrity commonly comprises five aspects: independence, transparency, integrity, competence and fairness.

These five ethical principles are highly important for a peaceful, accountable, credible and legitimate election. Elections that violate any of these principles can have their legitimacy questioned and results rejected by stakeholders, thereby leading to political conflict and chaos.

In contemporary academic work on electoral integrity, these five ethical principles are no longer deemed adequate, considering that elections should not only fulfill electoral integrity, but also create good governance. The implementation of electoral integrity may consolidate democracy in order to achieve the nation-state’s substantive goals. Here, democracy will be functional and effective to improve people’s welfare.

KOMPAS/PRIYOMBODO

Azyumardi Azra

Furthermore, elections hope to serve as a path towards achieving Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). This can only be achieved through a government whose public officials have unwavering integrity, strong commitment and consistency in upholding good governance.

Therefore, election bodies should ensure that candidates have good track records and no blemishes on their records regarding moral and legal violations. Only then can the people hope for good and effective governance.

Furthermore, electoral integrity in this new perspective hopes to build a culture of democratic politics. Only through electoral integrity can democracy gain people’s trust as a political system.

Azyumardi Azra, Culture and Humanities professor, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University