CNN Indonesia
Sunday, 19 Feb 2023 13:55 WIB
Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) questioned the urgency of changing the electoral system when the KPU already has a set schedule and agenda for the 2024 election. ANTARA FOTO/ASPRILLA DWI ADHA
Jakarta, CNNIndonesia —
The 6th President of the Republic of Indonesia Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) questioned the urgency of changing the Indonesian electoral system in the middle of the process 2024 election which is already running.
This was conveyed in line with the Constitutional Court (MK) which will soon decide on a judicial review of the electoral system, regarding the lawsuit for open voting to be closed, which will be carried out in Indonesia.
SBY admitted that currently he is engrossed in the fields of arts and sports. But now the issue of changing the electoral system intrigued him to participate in raising his voice in the world of politics.
“The information is that the Constitutional Court (MK) will soon decide which one to vote for and then implement it in this country,” SBY wrote in his writing quoted from SBY’s official Facebook page, Sunday (19/2).
SBY questioned the urgency of changing the electoral system when the General Elections Commission (KPU) already has its own schedule and timeline for elections.
“Is it right in the middle of a trip that has been well planned and prepared, especially by the political parties participating in the election, suddenly a very fundamental rule is changed?” he wrote further.
“This is of course on the assumption that the Constitutional Court will decide on a closed proportional system which must be adopted in the 2024 General Election which is currently under way,” said SBY.
SBY then questioned what urgency was being pursued so that the electoral system needed to be replaced in the midst of the 2024 Election. SBY then gave an example of a change in the electoral system in the midst of the 1998 election crisis.
“Is it now, when the election process has taken place, there is a crisis in our country, like the crisis situation in 1998 for example, so that the electoral system must be replaced halfway through,” he said.
According to SBY, changing the electoral system is indeed possible to be implemented in order to perfect the General Elections in Indonesia. Nevertheless, he prefers that these changes be made in a “calm” period and with joint deliberations.
“Instead of taking shortcuts judical review to MK. It is very possible that we can perfect the Indonesian election system, because I also see a number of elements that need to be better organized,” he added.
Regarding the election system, according to SBY, the people need to be involved to speak and be involved. This is also in accordance with the Indonesian state which adheres to democracy.
Moreover, according to him, changing the electoral system is not a decision and policy that is common in national management processes and activities.
“If we want to make changes that are fundamental, for example the constitution, the form of the state and the system of government and the election system, in essence the people need to be consulted. They need to be involved,” said SBY.
The proportional open election system for electing candidates is currently being sued to the Constitutional Court so that it can be held behind closed doors. In other words, voters are expected to simply vote for a party, no longer a candidate for a legislative candidate participating in the legislative election contestation.
The lawsuit for the proportional election system was filed by a number of parties, including involving PDIP figures.
Member of Commission III DPR RI from the PDIP Fraction Arteria Dahlan revealed that his party wanted the election to use a closed proportional system because Article 22E paragraph 3 of the 1945 Constitution explicitly states that election participants to elect members of the legislature are political parties (political parties).
“The provisions of Article 22E paragraph 3 of the 1945 Constitution explicitly state that the participants in the election to elect members of the DPR and DPRD are political parties. Thus, it is very clear and clear, it is the political parties that are very actively involved. Not only playing a role, but also competing as a logical consequence, then political parties should have and be given the authority to determine team formations, their best troops in the democratic party competition,” Arteria said while giving a statement on the judicial review before the panel of judges of the Constitutional Court, Thursday (26/1).
According to him, political parties have the authority to determine the best cadres who will fight in the elections. On that basis, according to him, it is very relevant if political parties also have the right to determine the cadres who will occupy legislative seats.
(del/gil)
