Publication Search

Discretion exercised by election management bodies constitutes an administrative instrument that is functionally necessary to prevent stagnation in electoral processes under conditions of legal vacuum, normative ambiguity, or extraordinary circumstances. However, in practice, discretionary decisions often generate public concern and expose election officials to the risk of criminalization, particularly when such discretion is assessed through a formalistic and result oriented criminal law paradigm. This study aims to analyze the construction of criminal liability of election administrators for the use of discretion in conditions of electoral stagnation, by examining the paradigm shift from the old Indonesian Criminal Code to the new Criminal Code and its implications for criminal law enforcement under the Criminal Procedure Code. This research employs a normative legal method using statutory, conceptual, and case approaches. The findings reveal that the old Criminal Code tended to facilitate policy criminalization by emphasizing formal violations and objective consequences, whereas the new Criminal Code introduces a substantive approach centered on subjective fault, official purpose, and rationality of action. Nevertheless, the lack of synchronization with the Criminal Procedure Code which remains focused on conventional evidentiary standards causes discretionary actions of election administrators to remain legally ambiguous. Therefore, harmonization between substantive criminal law and criminal procedure law, along with a transformation in law enforcement reasoning, is essential to ensure that discretion exercised by election officials is assessed proportionally, contextually, and in line with democratic principles.

General elections constitute a fundamental pillar of Indonesia’s democratic system, functioning as a mechanism for the exercise of popular sovereignty and the protection of citizens’ voting rights. During the 2024 Regional People’s Representative Council (DPRD) election in Tarakan City, the Badan Pengawas Pemilu Kota Tarakan recorded twelve reports of alleged administrative violations throughout the electoral stages, including during the national vote recapitulation process. Of these reports, three allegations were proven, involving violations related to the Additional Voter List, the Special Voter List, and the eligibility requirements of candidates running for the Tarakan City DPRD in 2024. Essentially, election law enforcement serves as a safeguard to ensure fairness, legal certainty, and the protection of citizens’ constitutional right to vote. This study aims to examine the implementation of legal enforcement mechanisms against administrative violations in the 2024 Tarakan City DPRD election. A socio-legal research approach was employed to analyze both normative regulations and their practical application. Referring to Peraturan Bawaslu Nomor 8 Tahun 2022 concerning the Settlement of Administrative Violations of General Elections, the findings indicate that the Tarakan City Bawaslu holds authority in adjudicating and imposing sanctions on proven violations. As a result, one candidate, Erick Hendrawan Septian Putra, was disqualified from Electoral District 1. Furthermore, sanctions were imposed on the chairpersons and members of Polling Station 88 in Karang Anyar and Polling Station 2 in Pamusian for failing to carry out their duties as voting organizing groups in the election and subsequent processes.

The enforcement of election criminal law plays a crucial role in safeguarding democratic integrity and upholding the principle of popular sovereignty. Law Number 7 of 2017 establishes the Integrated Law Enforcement Center (Sentra Gakkumdu) as a coordinated mechanism involving the Election Supervisory Body, the Police, and the Prosecution Service in addressing election crimes. However, in practice, the Gakkumdu system has not fully ensured a balanced realization of legal certainty, substantive justice, and legal utility. This study aims to analyze the problems of election criminal law enforcement within the Gakkumdu system, examine the relevance of the Restorative Justice approach in election law, and formulate a reconstruction of election criminal law enforcement based on this approach. This research employs normative legal research using statutory, conceptual, legal philosophy, and legal policy approaches. The findings indicate that the weaknesses in election criminal law enforcement arise from institutional fragmentation, normative ambiguity, and a legal culture dominated by legalistic and sectoral perspectives. The Restorative Justice approach is considered relevant as it prioritizes substantive justice and the restoration of democratic values. Therefore, reconstructing election criminal law enforcement based on Restorative Justice is essential to strengthening democratic legitimacy and public trust in elections in Indonesia.

This study aims to analyze the supervisory strategy of the Panwascam (Central Election Supervisory Agency) of Sinjai Borong District in handling election violations in the 2024 Simultaneous Regional Elections in Sinjai Regency. The study focuses on two main aspects, namely preventive strategies and repressive strategies. The research method uses a qualitative approach with case studies, through in-depth interviews, observation, documentation, and interactive data analysis. The results show that the Panwascam's preventive strategies include socialization of election regulations, political education, and strengthening coordination with village officials and community leaders. This strategy has been proven to increase regulatory understanding among lower-level election organizers and public political awareness, especially first-time voters. Meanwhile, the repressive strategy is implemented through violation handling mechanisms, preparing legal recommendations, and summoning perpetrators and witnesses. Based on field findings, the Panwascam successfully handled one case of violation of ASN neutrality that was recommended to the Regency Bawaslu. This study concludes that the supervision of the Sinjai Borong Panwascam is relatively effective, although it still faces limited resources, low public legal literacy, and strong local political patronage. The results of this study provide a conceptual contribution to strengthening the community-based electoral supervision model, which integrates regulatory, educational, and collaborative aspects. They also serve as practical recommendations for improving the quality of electoral democracy at the local level.

Law constitutes a set of rules that must be obeyed and implemented by every individual. The concept of law-making forms part of the broader meaning of legal politics, serving as a guideline for the governance of the state and the life of society. Law is a necessity for all components of the nation and the state to create security and order, thereby providing a sense of justice. General elections (Pemilu) conducted directly by the people, from the people, and for the people serve as a means of manifesting sovereignty for the state to produce a democratic government based on Pancasila and the 1945 Constitution. The administration of general elections direct, free, universal, and secret must be carried out honestly and fairly, capable of realizing national integration, professionalism, and accountability in order to position the people as the primary holder of sovereignty. This study employs a normative juridical legal research method with a statutory approach and a conceptual approach. The results of this research indicate that the legal concept concerning general elections depends on legal politics, which acts as a determining activity in the pattern and formation of election legislation designed to oversee and renew that law as a determination of politics related to democracy in the country. This study aims to ascertain the impact of the implementation of legal politics in the post-reform general election system and represents an existence of legal politics within Indonesia’s legal enforcement system.