Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Kewenangan penyelesaian sengketa pencalonan adalah hal yang baru oleh lembaga pengawas pemilu. Pada pelaksanannya, terdapat banyak kendala yang muncul, yang salah satunya adalah, akibat sengketa pencalona terjadi penundaan pilkada di lima daerah pada pelaksanaan Pilkada 2015. Padahal, sengketa pencalonan yang bertujuan untuk mewujudkan keadilan pemilu dan perlindungan hak plih, tak semestinya terjadi kendala seperti itu. Oleh sebab itu, dalam penelitian ini dirumuskan dua masalah, yakni bagaimanakah persoalan peraturan penyelesaian sengketa pencalonan di dalam pelaksanaan Pilkada 2015 dan 2017. Kemudian yang kedua apakah pelaksanaan penyelesaian sengketa pencalonan kepala daerah dalam pemilihan kepala daerah serentak tahun 2015 dan 2017 telah memenuhi prinsip keadilan pemilu. Pada Pilkada 2015 terdapat 115 perkara sengketa pencalonan yang diajukan ke pengawas pemilu. Kemudian pada Pilkada 2017 terdapat 62 perkara sengketa pencalonan yang diajukan ke pengawas pemilu. Serta terdapat dokumentasi dan pencatatan data sengketa yang tidak lengkap dan rapih di pengawas pemilu. Selain itu, ditemukan tiga persoalan peraturan penyelesaian sengkea pencalona, yakni tidak diaturnya Keputusan KPU sebagai objek sengketa, KPU yang tidak boleh mengajukan upaya hukum terhadap putusan pengawas pemilu, dan tidak sinkronnya pengaturan di UU Pilkada dan Peraturan KPU terkait jadwal penyelesaian sengketa pencalonan.Kemudian dari tiga indikator pemenuhan prinsip keadilan pemilu, ditemukan ketidakpatuhan terhadap waktu penyelesaian dan mekanisme penyelesaian sengketa. Ini terjadi di Kabupaten Aceh Tamiang, Aceh, Kota Pematang Siantar, Sumatera Utara, dan Kabupaten Fak-Fak, Papua Barat. Selain itu terdapat kekosongan hukum dalam penyelesaian sengketa pencalonan, yakni lembaga apa yang berwenang menyelesaikan sengketa pencalonan ketika keputusan diskualifikasi pasangan calon dikeluarkan oleh KPU RI. Sedangkan Bawaslu RI tidak memiliki kewenangan menyelesaikan sengketa pencalonan pemilihan kepala daerah. Hal ini terjadi di sengketa pencalonan Provinsi Kalimantan Tengah. Kemudian, terkait jaminan pemulihan hak pilih warga negara setelah proses sengketa pencalonan tidak tercapai, karena sengketa pencalonan tidak memulihkan hak pilih pasangan calon kepala daerah, kejadian ini terjadi di Kabupaten Dogiyai, Papua. Berdasarkan hal tersebut, penelitian ini memberikan rekomendasi agar dilakukan perbaikan terhadap dokumentasi dan publikasi data sengketa pencalonan di pengawas pemilu, serta perlu dilakukan perbaikan terhadap UU Pilkada, Peraturan KPU terkait dengan tahapan, program, dan jadwal pilkada, Peraturan Bawaslu terkait penangaan sengketa pencalonan, dan Peraturan MA terkait sengketa tata usaha negara pemilihan kepala daerah.

---

The elections monitoring body has recently been granted the authority to adjudicate dispute over candidacy process in elections, and this authority, by all means, is a novelty for the elections monitoring body. However, in practice, many problems occur due to this authority. For example, because of the adjudication process on electoral disputes in 2015 Local Elections, the elections commission had to postpone local elections in five electoral areas. Election adjudication process should have created a free and fair elections, not to postpone the elections and upset the election schedule instead. Therefore, in this research, I would like to address two objectives firstly, how is the regulatory dispute candidacy problem in regional head election 2015 and 2017 and, secondly, to analyze whether the adjudication processes conducted by the elections monitoring body on those disputes have been compliant with the principle of free and fair elections. In 2015 Local Elections, the elections monitoring body handled 115 cases of electoral disputes. In 2017 Local Elections, the body handled 62 cases of disputes. However, it is noteworthy that the elections monitoring body itself fail to make a proper documentations and records on the data regarding electoral dispute cases that they have handled. Based on the adjudication process, we can see that the electoral institutions have many times failed to comply with free and fair elections principle, for example when the elections monitoring body did not resolve a dispute case on time or according with the proper mechanism. Such failure happened, among others, in Aceh Tamiang, Aceh, Pematang Siantar, North Sumatera, and Fak Fak. In addition, the adjudication process also created a legal vacuum because they did not specify what institution has the authority to resolve the candidacy disputes when the Elections Commission KPU has issued the decision to disqualify a certain candidate. The Elections Monitoring Body, at that time, did not have the authority resolve such case in local elections. This legal vacuum especially happened in Central Kalimantan. Also, the adjudication process on electoral disputes have failed to protect the voting right of candidates because the adjudication process did not restore the right after the trial has completed. This is especially happened in Dogiyai Regency in Papua. Therefore, in this research I conclude that it is necessary to make a reform and improvement on the Local Elections Law, KPU Regulations on elections stages, programs, and schedule, Bawaslu rsquo s Regulations on candidacy disputes, and Supreme Court rsquo s Regulations on state administrative disputes in local elections."

"Kompleksitas Pencalonan dan Pemilihan Kepala Desa dan Implikasinya pada keterpilihan ldquo;Candidata Feto Chefi Suco rdquo; Perempuan Calon Kepala Desa . Studi Kasus di Desa Ma rsquo;abat, Aiteas, dan Ailili ndash; Distrik Manatuto ndash; Timor Leste.Banyak calon kepala desa perempuan gagal terpilih menjadi Kepala Desa di Timor Leste, merupakan kenyataan yang memprihati kan bagi perempuan dalam persaingan meraih posisi pengambilan keputusan di tingkat Desa. Penelitian ini berfokus pada perempuan dalam pemilihan kepala desa yang berlangsung di Distrik Manatuto. Sebagai studi kasus, penelitian ini mengangkat pengalaman lima perempuan calon kepala desa yang gagal pada pemilu 2016 di Desa Ma rsquo;abat, Aiteas, dan Ailili dengan pendekatatan penelitian kualitatif berperspektif feminis. Tujuan penelitian ini untuk mengkaji kegagalan perempuan calon kepala desa dalam pencalonan dan pemilihan kepala desa di Distrik Manatuto. Penelitian ini menghasilkan temuan sebagai berikut. Pertama, pelaksanaan pemilihan desa tidak sesuai dengan Undang-Undang No.9/2016, tentang Pemilihan desa. Pihak penyelenggara tidak netral dalam menjalankan tugas mereka, serta partai politik tidak mendukung perempuan dalam pencalonan diri menjadi kepala desa. Kedua, kuatnya pengaruh budaya yang menghambat pada pemilihan kepala desa di Timor Leste dan adanya pengaruh lingkungan/masyarakat yang patuh mengikuti himbauan tokoh adat untuk tidak memilih perempuan menjadi kepala Desa. Kata Kunci: perempuan kepala desa, kompleksitas, pencalonan, pemilihan kepala desa, patriarki.

---

The complexities of nominations and elections of village chiefs and their implications on the elections of women Village Chief Candidates. A case study in Ma 39 abat, Aiteas and Ailili Villages ndash the Municipality of Manatuto ndash Timor Leste. Many women village chief candidates failed in the village chief elections or were not elected to become village chiefs in Timor Leste is a fact that women are apprehensive about competition to gain decision making positions at the village level. This research focused on women in the elections of village chiefs in the Municipality of Manatuto. As a case study, this research raised the experiences of five women village candidates who failed in the 2016 elections in the villages of Ma 39 abat, Aiteas and Ailili, and the research applied a qualitative research with feminist perspectives. The purpose of this research was to examine the failure of women candidates for village chiefs in the village chief elections in Manatuto Municipality. This research resulted the following findings. First, the implementation of village election was not in compliance with the Law No. 9 2016 about Village Election. The Electoral body was not neutral in performing their duties, and lack of endorsement from political parties. Second, there were strong cultural influences impeding the village chief election in Timor Leste and there were influences of the environmental factors society which tended to dutifully follow the appeal from the traditional figures not vote for women to become the village chiefs. Keywords Women village chiefs, complexities, nomination, village chief elections, patriarchy."

"Penelitian ini dilatar belakangi oleh adanya putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 30/PUU-XV/2018 terhadap Kelembagaan Dewan Perwakilan Daerah, serta urgensi keanggotaan DPD RI yang berasal dari unsur partai politik akibat putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 30/PUU-XV/2018. Metode yang digunakan kualitatif dengan pendekatan Yuridis Normatif. Temuan pada penelitian ini adalah: Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusannya menegaskan bahwa frasa "pekerjaan lain" dalam Pasal 182 huruf i UU Pemilu bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 dan tidak mempunyai kekuatan hukum mengikat secara bersyarat sepanjang tidak dimaknai mencakup pula pengurus partai politik (parpol). Putusan MK tersebut berdampak pada larangan pencalonan anggota DPD dari unsur pengurus parpol. DPD tidak dapat diisi oleh pengurus parpol, "Pengurus parpol" struktur organisasi parpol yang bersangkutan. MK mengakui bahwa Pasal 182 huruf i UU Pemilu memang tidak secara tegas melarang pengurus parpol mencalonkan diri menjadi calon anggota DPD. Sikap MK berdasarkan putusan-putusan sebelumnya selalu menegaskan bahwa calon anggota DPD tidak boleh berasal dari anggota parpol. Sehingga, secara otomatis pasal tersebut bertentangan dengan UUD 1945 apabila tidak dimaknai melarang pengurus parpol mencalonkan diri menjadi anggota DPD. Mahkamah Konstitusi memiliki kewenangan untuk melakukan pengujian undang-undang terhadap konstitusi, memutus sengketa lembaga negara, memutus pembubaran partai politik, dan memutus perselisihan hasil pemilihan umum pada tingkat pertama dan terakhir. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi bersifat final artinya mencakup juga kekuatan mengikat (binding). Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi memiliki kekuatan mengikat, kekuatan pembuktian, dan kekuatan eksekutorial. Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 30/PUU-XVI/2018 pada pelaksanaannya telah terjadi problematika mengenai berlakunya putusan tersebut yang dianggap berlaku surut. Mahkamah Agung yang membatalkan PKPU Nomor 26 Tahun 2018 karena berpendapat bahwa Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 30/PUU-XVI/2018 berlaku surut. Namun Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 30/PUU- XVI/2018 tetap harus dilaksanakan, sehingga timbul ketidakpastian hukum. Mahkamah Agung dinilai telah mengabaikan putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi. Dalam kasus pelaksanaan Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 30/PUU-XVI/2018, penafsiran dari Mahkamah Konstitusi yang harus dijadikan pedoman dan dilaksanakan.

---

The background of this research is the existence of the Constitutional Court decision Number 30/PUU-XV/2018 against the Institution of the Regional Representatives Council, as well as the urgency of DPD RI membership originating from political parties as a result of the Constitutional Court decision Number 30/PUU-XV/2018. The method used in this study is to use a qualitative method with a normative juridical approach. The findings of this study are: The Constitutional Court in its decision emphasized that the phrase "other work" in Article 182 letter i of the Election Law is contrary to the 1945 Constitution and does not have conditionally binding legal force as long as it is not interpreted to include administrators of political parties (political parties). The Constitutional Court's decision had an impact on the ban on the candidacy of DPD members from elements of political party management. So, the DPD cannot be filled by political party officials. The "administrators of political parties" in this decision are administrators starting from the central level to the lowest level according to the organizational structure of the political party concerned. The Constitutional Court acknowledged that Article 182 letter i of the Election Law does not explicitly prohibit political party officials from nominating themselves as candidates for DPD members. Even though the Constitutional Court's stance based on previous decisions always emphasized that candidates for DPD members could not come from members of political parties. Thus, this article automatically contradicts the 1945 Constitution if it is not interpreted as prohibiting political party officials from nominating themselves to become members of the DPD. The Constitutional Court has the authority to review laws against the constitution, decide on disputes over state institutions, decide on the dissolution of political parties, and decide on disputes over the results of general elections at the first and last levels. The decision of the Constitutional Court is final, meaning that it includes binding powers. Decisions of the Constitutional Court have binding power, evidentiary power, and executorial power. In its implementation, there have been problems regarding the validity of the decision which is considered retroactive. The Supreme Court canceled PKPU Number 26 of 2018 because it was of the opinion that the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30/PUU-XVI/2018 was retroactive. However, the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30/PUU-XVI/2018 must still be implemented, resulting in legal uncertainty. The Supreme Court is considered to have ignored the decision of the Constitutional Court. In the case of the implementation of the Constitutional Court Decision Number 30/PUU-XVI/2018, it is the interpretation of the Constitutional Court that must be used as a guideline and implemented."

"ABSTRAKStudi ini bertujuan untuk menjelaskan pencalonan tunggal dalam kasus mundurnya calon penantang di kabupaten Timor Tengah Utara (TTU). Penelitian ini menggunakan metode eksplorasi kualitatif dan teori arena dari Neil Fligstein dan McAdam. Studi ini menyatakan bahwa pencalonan tunggal di pilkada TTU 2015 diakibatkan oleh struktur arena dan tindakan strategis aktor. Mundurnya penantang potensial didorong oleh adanya perbedaan sumber daya dan keterampilan politik yang relevan dan efektif untuk mobilisasi elektoral. Tidak hanya itu, penantang menarik diri karena merasakan kompetisi yang sangat rentan memicu konflik dan kekerasan. Hal itu karena menguatnya politisasi identitas yang sangat sensitif dan berpotensi memicu kekerasan antar pendukung. Penjelasan ini berbeda dari sejumlah kasus serupa seperti di Blitar (Sobari, 2017), Pati dan Jayapura (Lay et al. 2017). Perbedaan utamanya ada pada konteks arena kontestasi, jenis sumber daya yang penting bagi aktor, dan jalur menuju pencalonan tunggal. Perspektif ekonomi politik (oligarki lokal) dan politik kartel seperti di Pati dan konsep kepemimpinan ideal yang populer di Blitar, bukan penjelasan yang tepat untuk kasus ini. Penantang potensial tidak mengalami kendala dalam hal pendanaan, rekam jejak dan popularitas. Penantang bahkan mendapatkan dukungan mayoritas dari partai-partai politik yang ada. Namun mereka tidak siap melanjutkan kompetisi yang berat dan berpotensi konflik. Penantang meragukan kredibilitas institusi pemilihan dan keamanan. Mereka meyakini kompetisi tidak dapat berjalan secara bebas, adil dan damai setelah melihat petahana menggunakan cara-cara yang tidak demokratis untuk memobilisasi pemilih secara luas. Kondisi itu mendorong mereka untuk mundur agar pemilihan itu di tunda sehingga peluang mereka bisa menjadi lebih baik.

---

ABSTRACT

This study aims to explain the sole candidacy in the case of the withdrawal of the prospective opponent in North Central Timor district (TTU). It focuses on answering the main question of why this case could happen. The research, which uses a qualitative exploratory method and the arena theory of Neil Fligstein and McAdam, states that the sole candidacy in North Central Timor district (TTU) election was caused by the arena stucture and the actors strategic action.The withdrawal of the potential opponent was caused by the the differences in political skill and in effective and relevant resources to mobilize voters. Besides, the opponent felt that the competition was likely to trigger conflict and violence as the most sentitive identity politization got stronger and could trigger violence between supporters. The explanation differs from a number of similar cases in Blitar (Sobari, 2017), Pati and Jayapura (Lay et al. 2017). The main differences are on the context of competition arena, the type of important resources for the actor and the path or procedure leading to the sole candidacy. The political economy perspective (local oligarchy) in Pati and the concept of ideal leadership in Blitar are not at all the appropriate explanation for this. The opponent did not have any problem in terms of fund, track record, and populariy. They even got support from most political parties in that district but they were not ready to continue the competition which was heavy and that could cause conflict. They doubted the credibility of security and election institutions. Having seen the opponent using non-democratic ways in mobilizing voters massively, they were sure that the competition would not be freely, fairly and peacefully done. This condition made them withdraw in order that the election could be delayed and would in turn give them a better opportunity."

"Amandemen konstitusi yang berlangsung sejak tahun 1999 hingga 2022 mempertegas bahwa Negara Indonesia menganut sistem pemerintahan presidensial. Salah satu cara yang sering dibahas untuk meningkatkan efektivitas sistem pemerintahan presidensial adalah dengan melaksanakan pemilu secara serentak dengan menerapkan ambang batas pencalonan presiden yang sekarang diatur dalam pasal 222 UU Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemilu yang memberikan syarat kepada partai politik harus mendapatkan minimal 20 persen kursi DPR atau 25 persen suara sah nasional untuk bisa mengusung Calon Presiden dan Wakil Presiden. Dalam praktiknya, ketentuan ini selalu mengundang kontroversi dan sudah berulang kali diuji di Mahkamah Konstitusi. Tulisan ini akan menjelaskan secara detail bagaimana pengaturan ambang batas pencalonan presiden di Indonesia. Kemudian, tulisan ini juga akan menganalisis bagaimana ambang batas pencalonan presiden menurut putusan mahkamah konstitusi tahun 2022-2023. Tulisan ini disusun menggunakan metode penelitian doktrinal. Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa norma ambang batas pencalonan presiden tidak diatur dalam UUD NRI Tahun 1945, konstitusi hanya mengatur ambang batas kemenangan yang tercantum pada pasal 6 ayat (3). Norma ambang batas pencalonan presiden diatur secara detail pada undang-undang yang mengatur tentang teknis pelaksanaan pemilihan umum seperti UU No.23 Tahun 2003, UU No.42 Tahun 2008, dan UU No.7 Tahun 2017. Mahkamah Konstitusi dalam putusan-putusan nya selalu menegaskan bahwa norma ambang batas pencalonan presiden merupakan kebijakan hukum terbuka dan tidak bertentangan dengan UUD NRI Tahun 1945. Mahkamah Konstitusi menilai bahwa norma ambang batas pencalonan presiden memberikan dampak positif kepada sistem pemerintahan presidensial yang kuat.

---

The constitutional amendments that took place from 1999 to 2022 emphasized that Indonesia adheres to a presidential system of government. One way that is often discussed to increase the effectiveness of the presidential government system is to hold elections simultaneously by implementing the presidential nomination threshold which is now regulated in article 222 of Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections which provides conditions for political parties to obtain a minimum of 20 percent of DPR seats. or 25 percent of valid national votes to be able to nominate candidates for President and Vice President. In practice, this provision always invites controversy and has been repeatedly tested at the Constitutional Court. This article will explain in detail how the threshold for presidential candidacy is set in Indonesia. Then, this article will also analyze the threshold for presidential candidacy according to the decision of the constitutional court in 2022- 2023. This article was prepared using doctrinal research methods. The research results show that the threshold norms for presidential candidacy are not regulated in the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia, the constitution only regulates the victory threshold as stated in article 6 paragraph (3). The threshold norms for presidential candidacy are regulated in detail in laws that regulate the technical implementation of general elections, such as Law No. 23 of 2003, Law No. 42 of 2008, and Law No. 7 of 2017. The Constitutional Court in its decisions always emphasized that the threshold norm for presidential candidacy is an open legal policy and does not conflict with the 1945 Constitution of the Republic of Indonesia. The Constitutional Court considered that the threshold norm for presidential candidacy had a positive impact on a strong presidential government system."