Political Elites Guided by Pragmatism in Pursuit of Hegemony
Jakarta, IO – 2024 is Indonesia’s “year” for elections, a colossal political agenda that sees the presidential, legislative and regional elections being held in the same year. The simultaneous legislative and presidential elections on February 14, with more than 204 million registered voters, were hailed as the largest single-day simultaneous elections in the world.
Furthermore, on November 27, there will be simultaneous regional polls (Pilkada) to elect governors and vice governors, regents and vice regents, and mayors and deputy mayors in 545 regions (37 provinces, 415 regencies and 93 cities. This is the first nationwide simultaneous regional elections they were held in different rounds in 2015, 2017, 2018 and 2020. As many as 206 million voters have been included in the permanent voter list (DPT).
Pilkada 2024 is the fifth regional elections in Indonesia’s electoral history in which voters have the choice to vote for “blank box” or poke though a blank space on the ballot paper to reject a sole candidate. This phenomenon first emerged in the 2015 regional elections and it carries on until this year. Elections with a sole candidate in election studies are also known as “uncontested elections”, in which the number of candidates is the same or less than the number of seats contested.
Initially, a sole candidate was presented as an answer to the deadlock due to “hostage politics” played by the incumbent’s political opponents. The incumbent was so strong that their rivals decided not to nominate a candidate pair during the candidate registration. Finally, the incumbent became the only candidate. The hope was that the election would be postponed and held again in the next round. Thus, the incumbent’s political influence and electability could be diminished because he would no longer be an incumbent when the next election took place.
This cannot be separated from the implications of the provisions in Law 8/2015 concerning regional elections which did not allow the regional elections to be held if there was only one candidate pair contesting. At that time, ahead of the implementation of the first round of simultaneous regional elections in 2015, a number of regions risked having their regional elections canceled as a consequence of the provisions in Article 54 (5) of the General Elections Commission (KPU) Regulation 12/2015. This regulation was derived from the legal norms of Article 49 (8) and (9), Article 50 (8) and (9), Article 51 (2), Article 52 (2) and Article 54 (4), (5) and (6) of Law 8/2015 which requires that regional elections be participated in by at least two candidate pairs.
Plebiscite mechanism
In response to this situation, Effendi Ghazali, a political analyst with the University of Indonesia (UI) fled a judicial review of Law 8/2015 with the Constitutional Court (MK) and requested that the articles be declared “conditionally constitutional” as long as all phrases that mean “at least two pairs of candidates” or “at a minimum two pairs of candidates” can be accepted in the form or meaning of “a sole candidate pair with a blank column shown on the ballot paper.” Effendi also requested that all stages of the regional elections be continued and if on the polling day and vote counting it turns out that the sole candidate pair gets more votes, they shall be declared the victor. Conversely, if more voters choose to mark the empty column then the elections shall be repeated or postponed until the next round. The judicial review was partially approved by the MK through Decision 100/ PUU-XIII/2015. The apex court in its legal considerations mentioned a number of reasons as the basis for the ruling.
First, MK considered that the postponement of the election would go against the citizens’ constitutional rights to be elected and to vote. Second, even if such a postponement can be justified, there is still no guarantee that in the next round these rights would be fulfilled due to the provision requiring at least two candidate pairs. MK stated that a solution must be found so that the citizens’ constitutional rights by way of implementing the sovereignty of the people, namely the right to be elected and to vote in elections are still fulfilled without being restricted by the requirement on minimum number of candidates. According to MK, in order to guarantee the fulfilments of citizens’ constitutional rights, regional elections must still be held even if there is only one candidate pair, but only after serious efforts had been made to have at least two candidate pairs.
However, in its decision, MK rejected Effendi’s request to interpret the phrase “at least two candidate pairs” or “at a minimum two candidate pairs” in all articles under review can be accepted in the form or meaning: a sole candidate pair with an empty column shown on the ballot paper. MK was of the view that, first, regional elections that are only participated in by sole candidate pair must be held as a last resort, with the sole purpose to fulfil the constitutional rights of citizens. Second, in the regional elections that are only participated by one candidate pair, the manifestation of an electoral contest is more properly conducted through a plebiscite method that asks the voters to choose whether they “Agree” or “Disagree” with the candidate pair, not against an empty box.
If more voters cast their ballots in favour of “Agree”, the candidate pair in question is declared as the winner. Conversely, if the majority choose “Disagree”, the election is postponed until the next round. MK did not share the view that it is unconstitutional because the voters get to exercise their right to vote. According to MK, the plebiscite mechanism is more democratic than “winner by acclamation” where voters’ opinions were disregarded. This is also practiced in a number of countries including the United States (in the election of members of the House and Senate), England, Canada, Scotland (in the election of members of parliament), Iceland (in the presidential election), and Singapore (in the presidential and legislative elections).
MK Decision 100/PUU-XIII/ 2015 gave the legal basis for regional elections with sole candidate pair. Of the 269 regions that held simultaneous regional elections in 2015, sole candidacy took place in three region — Tasikmalaya regency in West Java, Blitar regency in East Java, and Timor Tengah Utara regency in East Nusa Tenggara. In all three places, the sole candidates — all incumbents — won after more voters decided to reelect them.
At that time, the sole candidate pairs were supported by only a few parties. In Tasikmalaya, Uu Ruzhanul Ulum-Ade Sugianto were supported by PDI-P, Golkar, PAN and PKS. In Blitar, Rijanto-Marhaenis Urip Widodo were supported by PDI-P and Gerindra. Meanwhile, in the Timor Tengah Utara, Raymundus Sau Fernandes-Aloysius Kobes were only supported by PDI-P.
Empty column
In the following years, there was a shift in regulations and nomination process with regard to sole candidacy. After adopting the plebiscite method in 2015 regional elections, lawmakers decided to revise Law 8/2015 and passed Law 10/2026 which discontinued the the plebiscite mechanism and replaced it with ballot paper containing two columns, one with the candidate pair’s photo and a blank column next to it This was almost similar to Effendi’s previous petition to MK.
Article 54D of Law 10/2016 also stipulates that KPU regional offices certify a sole candidate pair’s victory if they get more than 50 percent of valid votes (50% plus 1). And if they lose, they are allowed to run again in the next round in the following year or according to the schedule set forth in the laws and regulations.
If sole candidacy in the 2015 elections was chosen as a means to overcome the political deadlock and the legal vacuum in the conduct of regional elections, in the later development it became a pragmatic choice to secure the victory of a candidate pair, majority of them incumbents. The number of sole candidates has increased from one regional election to another, from three (1.16 percent) in the 2015 elections to nine out of 101 regions that went to the polls (8.91 percent) in 2017, to 16 out 171 regions (9.36 percent) in 2018 and 25 out of 270 regions (9.26 percent) when it was held during the Covid-19 pandemic in 2020.
There are a number of reasons why sole candidates are increasingly “in demand” as a shortcut to victory after the 2015 elections. First, candidates wish to secure and ensure victory from the early stages of the nomination process. Candidates are becoming more pragmatic and believe that it will be easier to control the political parties’ votes versus the people’s votes. Second, there are still barriers to entry in election contest by way of increasingly stringent nomination threshold for both independent candidate and those nominated by a party or a coalition of political parties.
Third, the hegemony of the power of incumbents or relatives of incumbents who create a political dynasty. Almost all sole candidates from 2017-2024 were incumbents or relatives of incumbents. Fourth, the centralization or concentration of nominations through a three-tier mechanism, which requires a recommendation from party administrators in regencies/municipalities, provinces and center. This is also suspected to entail the practice of political dowry which will heavily burden the candidates financially, potentially leading to corrupt practices once they take office.
Fifth, the problem with cadre regeneration in political parties. As a result, parties do not have potential candidates to be nominated and become trapped in cult of personality and a few influential figures within the parties. Potential figures are actually elected in the legislative elections but are reluctant to run in regional elections because they do not want to vacate their hard-fought seats. Sixth, the electability gap is too wide between one candidate and another. Seventh, the internal condition of the party is not solid and is worsened by divisions among cadres. As a result, the party has difficulty consolidating itself in the candidate nomination.
Eighth, the high-cost politics due to transactional practices, compounded by weak law enforcement. The majority involves misuse of funds, such as for “political dowry” (brokerage practices) or vote buying that have long tainted political parties in Indonesia. Finally, the pragmatism of political parties with the mindset it is better to build a bargaining position with existing stronger candidates rather than losing and spending enormous sum for campaign. This pragmatic attitude risks leading to the politics of “sharing the cake” which can potentially trigger political corruption, especially amid weak parliamentary control over the executive work in the regions.
Nomination threshold
In total, in the period between 2017-20 there were 50 regions out of 545 (9.17 percent) with sole candidates. Meanwhile, in the 2024 regional elections, the latest data from KPU as of September 16 showed that sole candidates are scattered in 35 regions (6.42 percent). This means that there has been a decrease. However, for the first time there will be a gubernatorial election participated by only one candidate pair in West Papua.
The decrease cannot be separated from the impact of MK Decision60/PUU-XXII/2024 which allows for more accessible and inclusive nominations for political parties or coalitions of political parties. MK ruling lowered the nomination threshold by parties or coalitions of parties which are now the same as that for independent candidate. Previously, to nominate their candidates, political parties or coalitions of political parties must have at least 20 percent of seats in regional legislature (DPRD) or 25 percent of the popular vote in the region.
The decision was hailed as a game changer as now political parties or coalitions of political parties only need between 6.5 to 10 percent of the popular vote, depending on the region’s number of registered voters, the greater the number of voters, the smaller the percentage. Although there are still sole candidates in more than 30 regions, MK ruling has significantly reduced the number of blank boxes. The Elections Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) chief Rahmat Bagja even said that had there not been MK ruling, there could be more that 100 sole candidates in different regions.
MK ruling has upended the candidacy configuration, resulting in a significantly reduced number of sole candidates. For example, the South Tangerang City where the incumbent mayor and vice mayor were backed by 16 political parties against a candidate from PKS. A similar situation also occurred in Bogor regency elections in which the candidate pair supporter by PDI-P was going against the same coalition. MK decision also thwarted the sole candidacy in South Sulawesi and Papua gubernatorial elections. It even made the East Java gubernatorial race more competitive with three contestants, all of them women. In the same veins, West Java gubernatorial election has been turned into a four-horse race. Thanks to MK, the 2024 regional elections have become more inclusive with a diversity of choices, resulting in healthier competitions and less predictable outcomes.
Not yet optimal
Despite fewer sole candidates following MK decision, there are still dozens of regions with uncontested elections. There are at least four factors behind this. The judgement was pronounced on August 20, near the candidate registration scheduled from August 27-29. The majority of nominee recommendations have been announced, especially by political parties’ central executive boards, and received by the prospective candidates. Nominations by political alliance had begun to take shape, meaning MK decision could not be optimally implemented in a number of regions.
Second, there is a commitment at the national elite level regarding the continuation of the grand Onward Indonesia Coalition (KIM Plus). The original KIM — comprising Gerindra, Golkar, Democratic Party, PAN, PSI, PBB, Gelora, Garuda and Prima — is the coalition that backed Prabowo Subianto-Gibran Rakabuming Raka in the February presidential election. The expanded members are PKS, PKB, PPP, Perindo and NasDem. In the regional elections, KIM Plus seeks to build cohesiveness between central and regional leadership to facilitate the acceleration of the new administration’s programs at the regional level. Most of the candidate supported by KIM Plus had been announced before MK seismic ruling.
Third, the strong dominance of incumbents with high electability and a solid political base made it difficult for party cadres in the regions to have a chance against. The parties finally chose to be realistic and pragmatic. Rather than supporting a candidate who would most likely lose and spend enormous funds on the campaign, it is better to join the coalition to support the incumbent with the highest probability to win and gain benefits from being part of the oversized coalition. This paradigm is visible, for instance, in the Surabaya, Trenggalek and West Papua elections.
Fourth, the specter of high-cost politics compelled party elites to be increasingly pragmatic and opportunistic. The nomination process that is centralized at the national level to obtain party’s recommendations is costly. Prospective candidates must spend a lot of money to get recommendations starting from the regional to the central level. This disincentivized them to field their own candidates despite MK judgement. In addition, the parties have just emerged from the intensely-fought presidential and legislative elections, leaving them “battered and bruised” in terms of finance and solidity, in addition to election fatigue.
Between 2015 and 2020, out of a total of 53 regions with sole candidates, only one was won by an empty box, i.e., the Makassar City election in 2018. This happened after the incumbent pair Mohammad Ramdhan Pomanto-Indira Mulyasari were disqualified by the Supreme Court (MA). The left their rival Munafri Arifuddin-Andi Rahmatika Dewi, supported by ten political parties, the sole contestant. In the process, the overwhelming support for the incumbent mayor was believed to contribute to the empty box’s victory, which garnered 53.23 percent of valid votes versus the sole candidate’s 46.77 percent. The election had to be repeated in 2020. Contested by four candidate pairs, Mohammad Ramdhan Pomanto-Fatmawati Rusdi was declared the eventual winner, beating Munafri Arifuddin-Abdul Rahman Bando in the runoff.
Room for improvement
In a democratic society, uncontested elections are far from ideal. There should be clash over ideas and policies, and voters should be given choices between at least two candidates even though in elections with sole candidate they can also exercise their right to vote by either supporting or rejecting the candidate, whether though plebiscite or blank box.
Choosing an empty box is not the same as abstaining because it is a legitimate and constitutional choice as a political channel for voters to make their stance known. If the empty box wins, then the election will have to be repeated the following year (2025). As a consequence, all stages leading to the polling day will also have to be repeated.
Moving forward, it is hoped that single candidacy can be further reduced and regional elections can truly become a contest between the best contestants. Thus, lawmakers need to seriously improve the electoral regulations. For example, evaluating the virtue of holding national and regional elections in the same year which most likely will overwhelm the organizer due to overlapping stages and heavy technical burdens. In addition, political parties cannot optimally conduct political recruitment due to very packed and intense political agendas. As a result, political pragmatism will increasingly become the norm and the public will become less informed about the big political visions.
Read: First Microsoft Excel competition to be held in October
Ideally, there should be an interval of at least two years between the presidential and legislative elections and regional elections. This will ensure that the party machinery can work optimally during the five-year cycle. Voters can also continuously evaluate the performance of the political parties and elites in-between the two simultaneous elections.
In the spirit of regional autonomy, nominations should be carried out in a decentralized manner where party administrators in the regions are given autonomy to nominate candidates according to the aspirations of the local cadres who know the constituents better. This will also prevent the mismatch between local aspirations and the parties’ top decision makers at the center so that there will no longer be hijacking of aspirations by elite hegemony that is rife with transactional politics.
In addition, to prevent vote buying, it is high time for lawmakers to realize the ratification of the draft bill restricting cash transactions. The law is urgent to suppress vote buying which has so far been given in the form of cash. Through these raft of improvements, it is hoped that elections will no longer be a routine ritual done every five years to circulate the political elites but instead contribute to nation-building goals whose success depends on the election of credible, visionary, and incorruptible government officials and representatives. (Titi Anggraini)