•  
  •  
 

Keywords

case settlement, general election administration, justice court proceeding

Document Type

Article

Abstract

Election administrative violations occur at the time of the implementation of the general election by election organizers and contestants. Sometimes, they do not realize that they have committed a violation. Since the general election during the reformation period after the fall of the New Order in Indonesia, there have been frequent violations of election administration resolved through administrative courts through the State Administrative Court. The dispute resolution was carried out after complaints were made through Bawaslu and DKPP as administrative dispute resolution (ADR) institutions and did not bring results. This administrative violation is considered detrimental to the candidate contesting the election, causing a dispute between the candidate contesting the election and the organizers of the general election. This article examines the process of resolving electoral administrative disputes in Indonesia and the judiciary's role in resolving electoral administrative disputes. Several examples of cases of election administration violations that occurred and their causes obtained through empirical studies using the technique of documenting judges' decisions that have permanent legal force at the Supreme Court of the Republic of Indonesia were analyzed using inductive logic.

First Page

334

Last Page

344

Page Range

334-344

Issue

2

Volume

18

Digital Object Identifier (DOI)

10.21831/jc.v18i2.44175

Source

https://journal.uny.ac.id/index.php/civics/article/view/44175

References

Amarini, I., & Hidayah, A. N. (2019). Judicial activism resolving administrative disputes in Indonesia. 3rd International Conference on Globalization of Law and Local Wisdom (ICGLOW), 358, 322-326.

Amsler, L. B. (2010). The next generation of administrative law: building the legal infrastructure for collaborative governance. In next generation of administrative law: building the legal infrastructure for collaborative governance (No. 2010-07-04; School of Public and Environmental Affairs Research Paper Series, Vol. 2010).

Butt, S., Crouch, M., & Dixon, R. (2016). Special issue: The first decade of indonesia's constitutional court. Australian Journal of Asian Law, 16(2), 113-12-.

Cahill-Ripley, A. (2014). Foregrounding socio-economic rights in transitional justice: Realising justice for violations of economic and social rights. Netherlands Quarterly of Human Rights, 32(2), 183-213. https://doi.org/10.1177/016934411403200205

Eilo Wing-Yat Yu. (2011). Electoral fraud and governance: The 2009 legislative direct election in Macao. Journal of Comparative Asian Development, 10(1), 90-128. https://doi.org/10.1080/15339114.2011.578484

Hegre, H., & Nygård, H. M. (2015). Governance and conflict relapse. Journal of Conflict Resolution, 59(6), 984-1016. https://doi.org/10.1177/0022002713520591

Kelliher, C., Isra, S., Daulay, Z., Tegnan, H., & Amsari, F. (2019). Unconstitutional authority of Indonesia's constitutional court: The resolution of Pilkada result disputes. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 18(3), 297-308. https://doi.org/10.1089/elj.2018.0535

Liddle, R. W., & Mujani, S. (2007). Leadership, party, and religion: explaining voting behavior in Indonesia. Comparative Political Studies, 40(7), 832-857.

Lupu, N., & Riedl, R. B. (2012). Political parties and uncertainty in developing democracies. Comparative Political Studies, 46(11), 1339-1365. https://doi.org/10.1177/0010414012453445

Malatesta, D., Amsler, L. B., & Foxworthy, S. (2017). Disputant preferences for mediated or adjudicated processes in administrative agencies: the occupational safety and health review commission settlement part program (1315 E. 10th St.; School of Public and Environemental Affairs).

McCafferty, S. (2009). Social justice and public policy: Seeking fairness in diverse societies. Health & Social Care in the Community, 18(1), 110-111. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2524.2009.00898_5.x

Mirbahar, H. N. (2019). Flawed laws, flawed elections: local elections in Pakistan. Election Law Journal: Rules, Politics, and Policy, 18(1), 1-15. https://doi.org/10.1089/elj.2017.0479

Norris, P., Frank, R. W., & Coma, F. M. i. (2013). Assessing the quality of elections. Journal of Democracy, 24(4), 124-135. https://doi.org/10.1353/jod.2013.0063

Pal, M. (2017). Canadian election administration on trial: 'Robocalls', opitz and disputed elections in the courts. King's Law Journal, 28(2), 324-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/09615768.2017.1351662

Pamungkas, C. (2017). Noken electoral system in Papua deliberative democracy in Papuan tradition. Jurnal Masyarakat dan Budaya, 19(2), 219-236.

Peerenboom, R., & He, X. (2008). Dispute Resolution in China: Patterns, Causes and Prognosis. In La Trobe Law School Legal Studies Research (No. 9). https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.1265116

Slater, D., & Simmons, E. (2013). Coping by colluding: Political uncertainty and promiscuous powersharing in Indonesia and Bolivia. Comparative Political Studies, 46(11), 1366-1393.

Ufen, A. (2008a). From aliran to dealignment: Political parties in post-Suharto Indonesia. South East Asia Research, 16(1), 5-41. https://doi.org/10.5367/000000008784108149

Ufen, A. (2008b). Political party and party system institutionalization in Southeast Asia: lessons for democratic consolidation in Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand. The Pacific Review, 21(3), 327-350. https://doi.org/10.1080/09512740802134174

Ufen, A. (2010). Electoral campaigning in indonesia: The professionalization and commercialization after 1998. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 29(4), 11-37. https://doi.org/10.1177/186810341002900402

Wise, C. R. (2001). Election administration in crisis: an early look at lessons from Bush versus Gore. Public Administration Review, 61(2), 131-139. https://doi.org/10.1111/0033-3352.00014

Download

Share

COinS