Safeguarding our democracy; Free, fair or fraudulent?

Independent Observer

IO, Jakarta – One month nearing to the Simultaneous Elections of 17 April 2019, the Final Voters’ List (Daftar Voters Tetap – “DPT”) is still an issue. The National Committee to elect Prabowo-Sandi (Badan Pemenangan Nasional – “BPN”) Director of Communications and Media, Hashim Djojohadikusumo, visited the Elections Commission (Komisi Votersan Umum – “KPU”) Office. Hashim stated that there are 17.5 million names in the DPT that he found to be suspicious. “The BPN’s IT team found issue with about 17.5 million names, at least. Some of these are doubled, while others are invalid,” he said at KPU’s Office, Jl. Imam Bonjol, Central Jakarta, on Monday (11/3/2019).

Hashim said the BPN’s IT team has verified and investigated data on the Stage Two Amended Final Voters’ List (Daftar Voters Tetap Hasil Perbaikan – “DPTHP”) on 15 December 2018. Hashim said suspicious data included things such as the accumulated number of voters born on 1 July as 9.8 million people, but the number born on other dates, such as 2 July, is only 520,000! This is suspicious. Hashim found three birth dates with a suspicious number of voters: 1 July at 9.8 million, 31 December at 5.3 million, and 1 January at 2.3 million. He added that BPN and KPU will check DPT at the region where the suspicious data is found. “Therefore, this is what we have told KPU, and we are happy that they gave us a positive response. Later on, we will be given time to perform a – not a match and study (pencocokan dan penelitian – “coklit”), but joint random field checks. We will check several things, then we will later report again to the media,” he said.

Meanwhile, Prabowo-Sandiaga BPN’s spokesman, Ahmad Riza Patria, said there is data on more than 300,000 people older than 90 years of age, and 20,475 people younger than 17 in the DPT list. Riza appreciates the fact that KPU has been open and positively respond to the findings. “KPU promises that it will correct, revise, and recheck. We hope that everyone will monitor this issue jointly and ensure that the DPT is clean; there is no manipulation of double data or other errors to make the elections a legitimate one,” said Riza.

Other than DPT, there are potential election frauds, from such things as money politics to foreign citizens holding Indonesian e-ID cards. As there are many types of potential fraud, we need to make ensure we monitor votes at Voting Points (Tempat Pemungutan Votes – “TPS”) and must be always wary.

The Role of the Organizer
Hendrajit, Executive Director of Global Future, said that indications relating to the management of the election organization by KPU so far, from controversial preparations to campaigns, show that security and organizers tend is strongly biased towards Presidential Candidate Pair number 01. It is true that a Prabowo-Sandi loss would make the public suspect fraud. In such a position, people power will hold an important role in straightening the results of the Presidential elections, in the worst-case scenario of an engineered loss.

If we refer to survey results, we would find interesting aspects. For example, the Polmark survey from Eep Saefulloh Fatah shows that even though Presidential Candidate Pair Number 01 Jokowi-Maruf is slightly in the lead, about 40% of voters remain free for grabs, as they are still doubtful and have not made up their minds yet.

If we take a closer look, about 50% of these undecided voters at least want a new leader. If we look at campaigns, we notice that Vice-Presidential Candidate Number 02 Sandi has become a magnet because most millennials would prefer to vote for Sandi as a representative of their generation. Therefore, Polmark concludes that Jokowi is still has a relatively slight advantage, but the dynamics might shift to either direction as 40% of voters still have not made up their minds yet. With this in mind, the possibility of Prabowo-Sandi’s loss in a worst-case scenario as in the Roy Morgan survey will be 42% for them and 58% for Jokowi-Ma’ruf, with the assumption that fraud has occurred. However, if the assumption is there’s no fraud, the calculation of votes for Prabowo-Sandi can exceed the Roy Morgan survey to even higher than 60%.

Meanwhile, Hamid Chalid, State Administration Law Expert from University of Indonesia, concludes that the people has a low trust in KPU’s impartiality as the organizer of elections. If we can nurture the people’s trust and confidence in KPU, then issues such as ballot boxes made of carboard, DPT, and TPS monitoring become secondary. “I don’t see KPU making any serious effort to show an impartial attitude as an organizer who is placed right in the center. Efforts to defend themselves over the findings of several “errors” (if we cannot call it fraud) in DPT, for example, continues to erode confidence. Therefore, concerns over things such as ballots made of cardboard and other issues arise,” Hamid said.

Hamid Chalid further stated that money politics is the most actual example. The lack of real action from either KPU or the Elections Monitoring Agency (Badan Pengawas Pemilu – “Bawaslu”) against blatant cases of money politics causes frustration and even apathy that the elections will be run honestly and fairly. This would actually injure the incumbent, as the antipathy would be directed to the Incumbent Pair Jokowi- Amin Ma’ruf. The mass, who might still be hesitant, now finds sufficient not to vote for Presidential Candidate Pair number 01. “I am actually most worried of vulnerability in TPS, because distrust towards KPU might cause voting in TPS to be vulnerable to rioting. I suggest that KPU should take real steps to show their seriousness and impartiality as organizer. That is the best way for forestalling any risk around voting cubicles when the elections are held,” he said.

The discovery of 17.5 million suspicious DPT data items by Prabowo-Sandiaga’s BPN is actually an opportunity for KPU and Bawaslu to rebuild the public’s trust. They need only do the right thing: involve both Prabowo-Sandiaga’s BPN and Jokowi-Ma’ruf’s National Campaign Team (Tim Kampaye Nasional – “TKN”) directly in the investigative process, and show the process openly to the public.

Political Observer from Al Azhar Indonesia University Ujang Komarudin considers that the Presidential Elections that bring Jokowi and Prabowo back together have a high potential for causing conflict. The people are also polarized into two teams, and this polarization has become sharper, harder, and wider. Ujang further stated that when the people distrust the election organizer, KPU should evaluate itself and work more professionally. They are paid to be neutral towards everyone – towards the contestants – towards the political parties and Presidential Candidate Pairs. Therefore, as the people, we must prove any lack of neutrality; we report, we monitor together. “If they are not constitutional, let us punish them together,” he said.

Association for Elections and Democracy (Perkumpulan untuk Votersan Umum dan Demokrasi – “Perludem”) Executive Director Titi Anggraini explained that the complexity faced in the 2019 Elections is worse than that of previous elections in terms of technicality and competitiveness, because the Legislative Elections are being held simultaneously with Presidential Elections. For Legislative Elections, there are 16 political parties competing for seats. They are faced with a big challenge for entry into  parliament (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Republik Indonesia – “DPR RI”) because there is the parliamentary threshold requirement of at least 4% votes to be won.

This complexity has a high possibility of generating fraud or violation in 2019 election practices. Other than deliberate fraud and violation, there might also be errors due to carelessness, lack of professionalism, or pure human error. The burden borne by the organizer is extreme: it must organize 5 types of elections simultaneously. Potential fraud to look for include money politics or vote buying, bribery of election organizers, because of the high stakes in this competition. This possibility mostly occurs during legislative elections, because legislative candidates and parties are interested in making sure that they fulfill the entry requirements for DPR RI, because the 4% threshold is extremely steep.

Furthermore, survey findings state that many parties might not make the threshold requirement for a DPR seat. All legislative candidates must compete with their comrades from the same party, as well as with legislative candidates of another party. The biggest challenge in the 2019 Elections is that the public pays more attention to Presidential Elections than to the Legislative Elections. This would weaken monitoring against Legislative Elections, meaning that money politics practice can occur more readily. Other than vote buying or bribery towards voters, bribery of the candidates or election organizers might also occur. This is our major challenge.

On the other hand, Presidential Elections are more likely to be filled with obvious frauds in terms of distribution of hoaxes and slanders against the Presidential Candidate Pairs. Presidential Elections tend to focus on issues that are controversial and do not educate the public.

Types of Fraud
There are many types of fraud. The most frequently used mode of fraud is directed towards concerns and fears. “I implore the Presidential Candidate Pairs in the Presidential Elections not to get trapped with the issue of the flooding in of foreign workers. Even though schemes that bring Indonesia and China closer do occur, the virality of the issue in social media is simply overdosed. I see it as a form of provocation, because one method for fixing votes is by using foreign workers who come to our country to work as extra voters. The issue is, if there is no influence from Chinese foreign workers but fraud occurs anyway, we are caught with prejudice,” Hendrajit said.

Election fraud occurs through three components: election organizers, security, and regulators. The fraud most frequently highlighted so far is mostly related to election organizing and security. These frauds are meant to generate the impression as if the only mode of vote rigging is Chinese foreign workers, but this is more directed towards instigation of riots. On the other hand, Prabowo-Sandi will be guarded by people power. If fraud occurs as in during the 2014 Presidential Elections, when anti-China sentiments and riot scenario were widespread, the riot scenario will be used for limiting the surge of people power. This is what we must be aware of, not just on technicalities. Technical fraud can occur in all lines. We must be aware of the perspective that if a riot scenario is created, the movement of people power will be limited.

As for the issue of foreign citizens holding Indonesian ID cards, and could possibly vote, it is true that vote rigging can occur with this method. However, what is being built is the issue of the flooding of Chinese foreign workers. We must expose this, because the entry way is through immigration, while the highest authority in the police tends to support the Head of the National Intelligence Agency (Badan Intelijen Nasional – “BIN”) Budi Gunawan. It is possible that on one hand, they are used for vote rigging, but they also viralize this issue for provocation purposes. Therefore, the anti-China sentiment will erode the potential for people power, who are actually ready to guard Prabowo-Sandi when later, for example, they lose and the people perceive a fraud here.

The cardboard ballots are part of a modus operandi with all controversies. But more importantly and more strategically, is KPU as both regulator and organizer the “referee” or the “player”? If the referee also plays, this is also a risk that we need to highlight. Issues such as ballots or other mechanisms like deviants playing with the DPT are more operational, technical, and tactical. But more importantly, is there any indication that the referee also takes part in the game?

With the widespread of such frauds, we simply doubt that fair elections can be held, because the potential for fraud is quite big when the referee joins the game. Governor of DKI Anies Baswedan, for example, dismissed his staff at district and sub-district levels with the basic idea of breaking plans related with the key elements of potential fraud. He realizes the existence of an active plan for committing fraud. As a systematic man, Anies is not baited with technicalities and changed the game by changing the players instead.

There are indications of fraud not only in Jakarta, and the most vulnerable point is the point of transfer from sub-districts to districts. Creating counter-actions such as monitoring TPS, thinking of monitoring mechanism at TPS level has become a challenge as well as the TPS contain risks other than euphoria. We must think of taking photos of TPS and other creative means of proving the honesty of the election. Strong indications of fraud do not mean that we should be pessimistic, but we must seek ways to neutralize these indications.

In terms of money politics, neither the authorities nor legislative candidates think that by giving bribes to people, people would note that they are unsavory, and thus an equally unsavory reputation of themselves is spread out among the public. This especially applies to elements of the public who are politically aware. Unless we are dealing with citizens in remote areas, citizens in cities and regencies would give a bad record when somebody gives them money suspiciously. Let us take the time Anies-Sandi went for the Gubernatorial position in DKI – their voters were not swayed by mere money. People who are given money may not vote your way even if they take your money.

Khairul Fahmi, Political Observer from Institute for Security and Strategic Studies (ISESS) said that TPS are critical points because conspiracies may occur between organizers and candidates. These spots are still vulnerable to vote rigging, even though anticipatory steps are taken. In order to minimize this occurrence, there is no other way than to improve the capacity and capability of anticipating weak points during election processes, whether related to organizers, candidates, or other relevant parties – even to the front line. Simply put, we all must be ready to open our eyes, ears, and mouths. The Incumbent may have all abilities and devices to help him with, but smart challengers would not lose so easily. This is like the duel between David and Goliath. Let us remember Max Weber’s famous words, “The people are an extremely powerful force!”

The fact that foreign citizens holding Indonesian ID cards is a serious problem that we have not anticipated until late and it has become a risk. However, it is not fully the organizer’s fault, as the initial voter database originates from data managed by the Ministry of Home Affairs. It is mostly the Ministry’s neglect.

The finding of 17.5 million suspicious DPT data by Prabowo-Sandi’s BPN is something that KPU must explain. It is also a potential fraud, because anyone has the opportunity to make use of this suspicious data. Khairul Fahmi stated that the remaining time before elections should also be used to check carefully for the possibility of unqualified people who are still listed as voters.

Many surveys and studies stated that money politics in the form of “sudden dawn attacks” to constituents are still expected by some of the people. However, the same surveys and studies also shows that the ability of such moves to affect change of voting decision becomes smaller as time goes by. This means that such “dawn attacks” no longer determine victory, but functions more as increase of votes in order to ensure victory and expand the gap with competitors. “I find that it is the money politics that occur during the initial stages and in the middle of the campaign period, which includes various schemes of vote-buying, are better able to affect selection. Especially since the undecided voters’ niche is still quite large, and they contain not only transactional voters but also rational or pragmatic voters. For example, the incumbent extravagantly raised Civil Servant wages, raised the benefits for Village Mentor Soldiers (Bintara Pembina Desa – “Babinsa”): that’s a clear form of transactional activity,” Khairul Fahmi said.

Ujang Komarudin has criticized and disapproved of cardboard ballots from the get go. “If it rains on cardboard boxes, or if we take them to extreme regions, there is a large potential of fraud. Therefore, why don’t we make it from aluminium from the start, so we can also save money by using them from one election to another. I really regret KPU having made such a decision. However, because it is decided, let us monitor it together,” he said.

As for foreign citizens holding ID cards, Ujang believes that this is stark carelessness on the part of the election organizers. Foreign citizens may be given Indonesian ID cards, but cannot be listed in the DPT. We must strongly remind people of this: that they are not our citizens and should not be given ID cards and be listed in the DPT.

In order to prevent DPT rigging or double-data DPT, all electoral participants, whether legislative candidates, political parties, or Presidential Candidate Pairs, must prepare trained witnesses with strong knowledge that would allow them to avoid fraud from any party whosoever. They can control and minimize these potential frauds. “We can take photos of the result of voting counts to serve as evidence, “Ujang said.

Ujang further stated that money politics will continue to increase massively and widely in this Elections. What are the indicators? The Elections are being held simultaneously, and many legislative candidates are new and unknown faces. Most people only know Presidential Candidate Pairs. “This lack of recognition provides a great potential for money politics. The people will then vote based on what they are paid for,” he said.

Former KPU Commissioner Hadar Nafis Gumay said that foreign citizens who might potentially vote may occur if their names are listed in the DPT. However, officers on duty in TPS will check the electronic ID cards belonging to these foreign citizens and check their names and citizenship statuses. If they are proven to be foreign citizens, they may not vote. News that foreign citizens are mobilized as voters in Indonesia must also be confirmed. In any case, the potential for it is slim, because there is a control mechanism involved in the processes performed in the TPS. Even if foreign citizens are caught voting because the officers are careless, then the entire TPS must redo the voting.

Prabowo-Sandi BPN found 17.5 million suspicious DPT data items. KPU is free to check this claim and explain it. “I think our citizenship and voter lists are imperfect for many understandable reasons, for example some voters are recorded as having the same birthday because they did not remember their birth dates, so a random date is assigned to them. The people actually exist, but they simply do not know for sure when they were born,” Nafis said.

KPU must truly explain what it has been doing, what mechanisms they have in place to minimize fraud, to ensure that the officers work according to the set procedures. We need to remind everyone not to attempt any funny business in elections. Prevention of potential fraud must also start from the candidates, and we must make the election’s candidates, organizers, monitors, and law enforcement aware of the importance of this event. Elections are democratic, and candidates must play fair in order to get voters to agree to their programs.

Titi Anggraini stated that the people pay more attention to Presidential Elections because of Presidential Election euphoria. Therefore, monitoring in TPS becomes weak, because later, they would first count Presidential Elections votes in TPS, then that for the People’s Representative Council (DPR), House of Regional Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Daerah – “DPD”), Provincial Regional Representative Council (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah – “DPRD”), and Regency/Municipal DPRD. This opens up opportunities of transactional politics and manipulations in Legislative Elections, such as rigging the results, acrobatics for changing votes, and transfer of legislative candidate votes. In the 2009 elections, when the threshold was 2.5% votes won with 38 parties competing. Therefore, the parties who did not meet the parliamentary threshold requirement performed transactional politics by selling their votes to other political parties. Such practices might not be as vulgar and blatant as before, but they might still occur.

Prabowo-Sandi BPN’s finding of the suspicious 17.5 million DPT data items was based on IT analysis of Citizenship Registry Numbers (Nomor Induk Kependudukan – “NIK”) and Family Card Numbers (Nomor Kartu Keluarga – “NKK”). Political parties have carte blanche from election organizers toward this data, and the data analyzed by political parties originate from the list of names and numbers listed by election organizers using the latest technology. Unusual data does not mean that the person does not exist, because it is an analysis of NIKs and NKKs using IT system. There is some carelessness involved because of erroneous input, but the issue is that there are voters with the same birth dates. The Directorate General of Demographics and Civil Registry (Direktorat Jenderal Kependudukan and Pencatatan Sipil – “Ditjen Disdukcapil”) explains that if a person forgets his/her birth date month, then his/her data is listed as the same with several other people already listed. This is what KPU must explain to back up its guarantee that the person really does exist. Something like this should have been identifiable from the start. KPU must be open for input and validate and clarify data items carefully. KPU needs only explain and communicate the data findings openly, transparently, and accountably to the public. This will help the public to understand the situation and accept it. The longer KPU takes to communicate to the public, the bigger our concern that some people would insinuate that there is fraud involved. Political parties can still control the DPT until Election Day because they will get copies of DPT per TPS, and there are witnesses in each TPS. Therefore, if there is suspicious data, we can watch it all the way until Election Day.

Ballots made of cardboard are actually not an issue, as long as the integrity of the officers assigned to guard them is intact and they are credible. As for foreign citizens having ID cards and potentially voting, Titi believes that the conflict occurs because there is a gap of information and the public does not understand about e-ID cards for foreign citizens. The people only know that e-ID cards are the primary requirement for voting and proof of Indonesian citizenship. Therefore, anyone having an e-ID card is an Indonesian citizen. “However, I do not think that the listing of foreign citizens in the DPT is not by design, but because of carelessness, neglect, and limited knowledge of e-ID cards. Especially since the foreign workers’ e-ID cards are too similar with Indonesian citizen e-ID cards. Most of these foreign citizens do have e-ID cards because they have permanent residence permits due to their marital status. This is a highly sensitive issue, because anything that is related to foreigners easily triggers the people’s emotions – especially if they are related to Chinese citizens. If the issue is not straightened up immediately and good public communication is built from various elements, the Government will especially be accused of injustice. We must remember that many Indonesian citizens are still waiting on the administration and delivery of their own e-ID cards,” she said.

Former KPU Commissioner Chusnul Mar’iyah believes that everyone involved in the execution of the elections have the potential to perform fraud, especially the candidates. They might perform any type of fraud, starting from vote buying. But the one with better access for performing fraud is the incumbent, because the incumbent controls all State apparatus: the bureaucracy, the military, the police, and even the intelligence agency. Furthermore, they have unlimited access to both the State Budget and Regional Budgets. “Incumbent” here includes both the executive power incumbents and legislative power incumbents. “I have always said to the Bawaslu: first, watch the candidates; second, watch the incumbents; and third, watch the organizers. The opposition is watched as candidates, because they do not have direct access to the State’s apparatus and APBN budget,” she said.

Chusnul further states that the election organizer is comprised of the Voting Committee (Panitia Pemungutan Suara – “PPS”), Voting Organizer Group (Kelompok Penyelenggara Pemungutan Suara – “KPPS”), District Voting Committee (Panitia Pemilihan Kecamatan – “PPK”), Regency/Municipal KPU, Provincial KPU, and Central KPU, plus Bawaslu parallel institutions such as monitors in TPS, Monitoring Committees in the District, Bawaslu in Regency and Provincial Level, and Central Bawaslu. Any and all of these have the possibility of committing fraud.

Actors whom can also be monitored to prevent election fraud are the economic oligarchs or major entrepreneurs who are involved in the support of Presidential Candidate Pair. The Law has rules for giving donations, both individuals and corporations have donation limits according to the constitutions. Political parties may conspire with economic oligarchs. Many entrepreneurs cash in by taking projects only after Presidential Elections are won according to their preference. Other actors that may perform fraud are media with fake news, as well as survey agencies that can be used as propaganda tools, depending on who pays them. Another fraud that voters must monitor are foreign workers, because it is possible that these non-citizens are given e-ID cards and vote with us. We must be especially wary of these things.

The finding of the 17.5 million suspicious DPT data items must be investigated. The one most guilty in this case is the Ministry of Home Affairs, because this is their task. The ones who get the funds for updating voter data are the Ditjen Disdukcapil of the Ministry of Home Affairs. Therefore, to be more specific, the Ditjen Disdukcapil must take responsibility. KPU should have obtained clean demo­graphics data from Ditjen Disdukcapil, in order to prevent our State from double expenditures of the budget. Imagine, two agencies doing the same thing, yet KPU must still request quite a large amount of funds for the coklit process, for voters’ data and information system (sistem informasi data pemilih – “sidalih”), and for recheck in the field. What happened to the funds granted to the Ministry of Home Affairs for this purpose? This is why we must reopen the case, especially since some of the deviants who corrupted e-ID cards funds have also been jailed.

“I disagree with the idea of assigning the building of our demographic system using the services of private companies: that’s not proper. Our demographic database has 12 variables. This system was first made in RI by the KPU of 2004, when I was still there. After it was completed, we transferred it to the Ministry of Home Affairs on 8 December 2004 gratis. Then in the subsequent elections, they changed the database’s nomenclature to the List of Potential Election Voter Citizens’ List (Daftar Penduduk Pemilih Potensial Pemilihan Umum – “DP4”). In the 2014 elections, the nomenclature was changed again into e-ID cards. When I worked for KPU in 2004, we had Rp 427 billion budgeted for our creation of the demographics database. They then changed it to DP4 with a budget of Rp 3.8 trillion, then to e-ID cards with a budget of Rp 5.8 trillion. Even then, KPU still requested Rp 1.6 trillion to clean up the data created by the Ministry of Home Affairs for updating. Therefore, the Ministry of Home Affairs did not create new data but merely updated it, this is a problem. The fact in the field shows that there are some foreigners included in the DPT, yet there are some Indonesian citizens – our own citizens – who have e-ID cards but whose data is not included in the DPT. When I was in KPU, we asked the people to check whether or not their names were listed in the DPT and we gave them the opportunity to correct the issue within a specific deadline. We performed door to door dissemination of this information to the regions in 2004. We divided the regions and combed them alongside Statistics Indonesia (Biro Pusat Statistik – “BPS”) simultaneously throughout Indonesia,” Chusnul said.

“Money politics” is more than mere vote buying by suddenly distributing monies to the people at the morning of the election. It also includes access to the State Budget and create popular programs. How far would KPU consider this as a method of money politics? Why is it done only within the past two months? That’s the question. The one that we need monitor for this type of transaction is the PPK, which is located far from TPS and whose duty is to total the results gained by Sub-district TPS.

Campaign Obstruction
When Prabowo-Sandi had the difficulty of renting venues for their campaigns, as what happened in Yogyakarta and Bandung, they actually earned a positive brand image from the public: that the Presidential Candidate Pair number 02 are the victims of an obvious injustice. This is not a problem – in fact, this builds up strong militancy among their followers. How come? “I think that apart from vulgar and blatant attempts at obstruction, Jokowi’s government lacks internal integrity at organizer security level. For example, there are rifts in the police and intelligence,” Hendrajit said.

During the campaign period, it must be admitted that Prabowo-Sandi found it difficult to lease venues to perform their campaigns. Khairul Fahmi admitted that their difficulty in getting campaign venues cannot be called a fraudulent act, as it is about taking sides and being influenced. If the lease is related to private parties, we cannot charge them as being fraudulent as long as there is no evidence of the involvement or intervention of either the election organizer or anyone else behind the rejection. “Therefore, I suggest that it is important to ensure that all terms and conditions, including those related to necessary documents, be satisfied in order to pre-empt any reason to obstruct any of our activities. If we have satisfied all requirements but we still get obstructed, then we may have our suspicions,” he said.

Ujang stated that the State must treat both Presidential Candidate Pair number 01 and number 02 fairly. Complaints from Presidential Candidate Pair 02 that states that they find it hard to get a building for campaigns must be especially noticed, because fairness is something that all citizens must enjoy. “It would be troublesome and dangerous if justice and fairness are no longer there. Therefore, we request that law enforcement remains professional in their work. After all, they belong to the people, so everyone is granted with the same opportunities and time in order to ensure that the contest is being held fairly. This would bring pride to all of us,” he said.

Democratic Consolidation
Hendrajit concludes that when the 2019 Elections are completed, the situation if Jokowi loses would not be too far different than when it happened to Ahok: the potential for riots would only last for a week or two, but if Prabowo loses, the public would think that Prabowo-Sandi were cheated. The people’s power will rise, because the foundation has been made through the 411 and 212 rallies. The basis is no longer about reacting towards blasphemy, but also triggering the sub-conscience of elements of the people relating to economic injustice, legal injustice, group discriminations, etc. that would lead towards people power comprised of people who share the chemistry of race and ideas, so that they gather massively. Even the 212 Reunion was worthy of consideration in terms of both mass and quality. If people power is raised, Prabowo-Sandi cannot be dammed, because people power is peaceful and non-violent. Despite being a moral movement, its political volatility is quite large, and its revolutionary implications enormous. Just look at the Philippines in 1986, when President Cory Aquino first came into power.

Law enforcement must still obey the provisions of Election Law and its derivative regulations. We need to review the spirit of the State’s organizers, whether election organizers, security, and regulator, in performing the elections honestly and fairly.

So far Khairul Fahmi considers the normative processes of elections to still run smoothly. Building trust in the organization is very important. We must be anticipative, skeptical, critical, and wary, but that does not mean that we are pessimistic and suspicious, let alone being excessively so. Remember, anyone still has the potential for winning and losing. Don’t build a perception of early defeat by basing on the assumption that the elections process is untrustworthy.

Khairul Fahmi also hopes that the law can be upheld nearing the Presidential Elections, even though we are all aware that our law enforcement is still a problem. The problems are not related to elections only. There is still the basic problem that our law enforcement still finds it difficult to maintain an ideal distance from power. It would potentially injure somebody when law enforcement is partial, and this is our classic problem. We must remain critical

The hope for honest and fair elections can be felt by the Indonesian people. Khairul Fahmi continues to hope and to maintain the hope, whether through moral speeches and real actions. For example, he reports all types of organizer actions and policies that are suspected to lead to partiality or fraud. Remember, we still have the Elections Organizer Honorary Council (Dewan Kehormatan Pelaksana Pemilihan Umum – “DKPP”) that serves as the dispenser of justice relating to organizer ethics. We cannot just rush into pessimism and do nothing but grumble, as that means that we simply close our eyes and suffer things to happen. Whether our reports are followed up or not, whether the results are according to our expectations or not, that is a different matter entirely. We can measure the quality of the organization and results of elections from there.

Titi Anggraini believes that with the current condition of our election organizer, this is the fifth elections being held after reforms. It is an extremely important turning point for consolidating democracy in Indonesia. Therefore, the honesty and fairness – or lack of these – in our elections depend on many parties and many factors: election regulations, election organizer, candidates, and voters. The public must also control the election process. The people must really want to participate and contribute by monitoring and guarding the entirety of the process. “I believe that the fraud can be suppressed. As for total elimination, I believe that there is not a single election in the world is free from frauds or violations, but they can be minimized. Therefore, the people’s role for caring is extremely important, and the assistance of the media in providing sufficient information to voters so that they can take part in the monitoring and guiding of election processes is extremely important,” she said.

Titi suspects that fraud will increase within the context Legislative Elections, and that currently there are some disparities or inconsistencies in elections law enforcement that can easily be perceived as injustice towards the opposition. Such treatment can be capitalized on optimally, because it is in fact there. Law enforcement processes must be performed openly, transparently, and accountably. The people must be given measurable explanation of these processes, because issues relating to law enforcement and injustice can cause dissatisfaction that will trigger unwanted actions, for example violence, conflicts, and distrust of democratic parties. “Some practices in the field are inconsistent with proper law enforcement. For example, some ads that involve the incumbent are not considered to be violations, but public meetings involving the opposition is frequently marked as violations while they have the same legal application. This inconsistency is easily capitalized as a form of legal injustice and it will be easy to provoke the public with them,” Titi said. (Dessy Aipipidely, Ekawati)