Observer: Regional Election Reform Must Focus on Improving Political Governance

The Indonesian Institute (TII) assesses that local democratic reform should focus on improving political governance, such as oversight, political funding, and eradicating money politics, rather than changing the mechanism for regional head elections (pilkada) to be conducted by the Regional People’s Representative Council (DPRD). TII Research Associate Arfianto Purbolaksono, during an online public discussion in Jakarta on Wednesday, stated that the discourse on DPRD-based elections has resurfaced due to high political costs, rampant corruption cases among regional heads, and the practice of money politics in electoral contests. However, he argued that changing the election mechanism would not necessarily resolve these issues. “The question that should be answered is not simply whether the Pilkada mechanism needs to be changed, but whether that change can truly solve the fundamental problems of local democracy in Indonesia. If the root problem is weak political governance, then what needs fixing is the system, not the people’s right to elect their leaders directly,” Arfianto said. Some elites support the DPRD mechanism for reasons of budget efficiency, reducing political costs, and government stability, while opposing groups view direct elections as part of citizens’ constitutional rights and an embodiment of popular sovereignty. Analysis of various national surveys by TII shows that the majority of the public still wants regional heads to be elected directly, revealing a perception gap between some political elites and public aspirations. Arfianto also assessed that the assumption that DPRD-based elections would automatically reduce political corruption lacks a strong empirical basis. He noted that past experience shows money politics still occurred when regional heads were elected by the DPRD. “Political corruption is not determined by the election mechanism. The far more decisive factors are the quality of oversight, transparency, the integrity of political actors, and the political funding system. Changing the mechanism without improving these factors will only shift the arena of corruption, not eliminate it,” he said. He added that direct elections provide stronger political legitimacy because regional heads receive a mandate directly from the people. Conversely, the DPRD mechanism is considered potentially to create an empirical legitimacy deficit that could lower public trust and strengthen regional heads’ dependence on political elites. According to him, the issues of political costs, corruption, and money politics cannot be used as reasons to reduce public participation in choosing their leaders. He added that Constitutional Court Decision Number 195/PUU-XXIV/2026 has provided constitutional certainty that regional heads shall remain directly elected by the people. Therefore, the reform agenda should be directed at improving political funding, party cadre development, oversight, and eradicating money politics. Meanwhile, Populi Center Research Manager Dimas Ramadhan stated that public preference for direct regional elections is approaching a national consensus. Based on a Populi Center national survey, 89.3 percent of respondents want governors to remain directly elected, while 94.3 percent want regents and mayors elected directly by the people. According to Dimas, a change to the election system would only be acceptable if it could deliver a better quality of democracy than the current system. “As long as these prerequisites are not met, public preference for direct elections cannot be ignored,” he said. In its recommendations, TII encourages political financing reform, strengthening oversight and law enforcement, enhancing the integrity of political parties, public political education, and public involvement in every electoral policy change as efforts to strengthen the quality of local democracy without diminishing citizens’ constitutional right to elect regional heads directly.