TheJakartaPost
Please Update your browser
Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.
EDITORIAL: Convicts for regional heads?
Change Size
Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) deputy chairman Laode Muhammad Syarif (right), accompanied by KPK spokesperson Yuyuk Andriati, speaks to the press on Tuesday about Southeast Sulawesi Governor Nur Alam being named a suspect for bribery related to mining licenses. (Antara Photo/Hafidz Mubarak A)
T
he government, House of Representatives and General Elections Commission (KPU) are testing the conscience of voters who will elect their leaders in the simultaneous regional elections scheduled for Feb. 15, 2017. The KPU, upon request, if not pressure, from both the government and lawmakers will allow convicted criminals to vie for regional head posts in seven provinces, 76 regencies and 18 municipalities in the election.
Defying public criticism, the KPU will soon issue a regulation that will exempt people who have been found guilty of petty crimes, and therefore received suspended jail terms, and political prisoners from a ban on contesting elections slapped on convicts by Article 7 of the 2016 Regional Elections Law. The article stipulates that anyone who has been convicted by a legally binding and final court verdict is not eligible to run in regional elections. A former convict is qualified but has to publicly declare his or her criminal record.
KPU commissioner Ida Budhiati refers to petty crimes as offenses committed inadvertently or without malice as often happens in traffic accidents.
This change to the rules of the game is legally flawed in more ways than one. First, the KPU regulation, if enforced, will go against the Regional Elections Law. Second, it is vulnerable to a judicial review. If such a challenge is filed at the Supreme Court it will drag the KPU into an unnecessary legal debate that will distract it from its preparations for the regional elections.
We cannot expect the government to disclose the real motive behind its controversial amendment. Whether it wants to spare certain candidates from disqualification simply because of small stains in their track record or to protect the rights of political prisoners who intend to contest local elections, only time will tell.
But the fact that the policymakers opted to pass the burden to the KPU rather than going through the normal law amendment process, which takes more time, only gives the impression that there is something fishy happening here. Worse, there has been no public consultation to measure the appropriateness of the policy.
The government and the House have simply ignored the voices of many, particularly critics, who wish to see improvements in regional elections so that they generate quality and credible leaders. For more than a decade, direct regional elections have generated many local leaders who are obsessed with their own rather than their people’s welfare, as evident in the conviction of 56 regional heads
for corruption.
Quality regional elections can become a reality if, among other prerequisites, only candidates with clean and clear track records contest them. In fact, many candidates with dubious credentials, such as criminal suspects have run and, sadly, won, although eventually the central government dismissed them or suspended their inauguration indefinitely.
Petty or serious, a crime is a crime. If petty crime convicts can now aspire for regional head posts, those convicted of serious crimes will later demand equal treatment too. The law always makes exceptions, but in Indonesia the exceptions are just too many.
