Electoral procedures hamper public participation

Bambang Nurbianto, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

It is unlikely that people will be able to change the result of the gubernatorial election due to the standard electoral procedures.

However, people can lodge a complaint against the elected officials if they suspect that money politics took place.

The set procedures give the impression that the public is invited to take part in the election process, but in reality public participation is not applicable.

"Don't expect too much from public scrutiny as it will won't change anything. The procedures and requirements are designed to make it impossible to prove anything," Indria Samego, a political analyst from the National Institute of Sciences (LIPI), said.

On the two days following the election, only a few councillors were seen inside the City Council building. The council has not publicized the procedures for public screening and there is no room or desk set up or any officials tasked to receive public complaints.

Ibnu Soemantri, the deputy chairman of the electoral committee, said that as of Friday, the committee had only received one complaint about money politics, but it was deemed invalid because it had not been filed by a leader of an organization and it lacked sufficient proof.

The complaint, filed by Sutawidhya, a resident of Jakarta who was running for vice governor, was based on a newspaper report.

According to electoral procedures, the public has three days to lodge objections against the governor and vice governor after they are elected. Since the third day falls on Saturday, the deadline has been extended to Monday.

"The public is given a month to complain about the results of the election, but I don't think anything will come of it as I doubt the councillors have the political will to seriously investigate the matter," Indria said, adding that it was unlikely that a councillor who received a bribe or the one who offered it would confess.

The election procedures say that public scrutiny of the elected governor is limited to the suspicion of money politics being applied before, during or after election day. The report should be given to the election committee by leaders of organizations registered in the city administration.

The committee would follow up with a public report on the alleged practice of money politics if there was strong enough evidence to back it. The allegation would be considered valid if the election committee later received a confession from more than one councillor admitting that they took bribes and from the elected governor or vice governor that they offered bribes.

If money politics is proven, the election process would be annulled and the pair could not be reelected.

Indria said that the difficulty in proving money politics was not only due to the short period and the complicated procedures, but also a lack of seriousness from the councillors in responding to public reports.

Similar comments came from the chairwoman of the Urban Poor Consortium (UPC) Wardah Hafidz, who said the City Council was only paying lip service by inviting public participation.

Wardah, however, called on the public to use this channel if they had evidence that money politics played a role in the election.

A similar comment also came from the chairman of the Betawi Assembly (Bamus Betawi), Abdul Syukur, who said that the assembly, together with its supporting organizations, would investigate all reports made by the public about money politics in the election.