Law and Politics: Study of the Presidential Threshold in the 2019 General Election of Indonesia

JM Muslimin, Ahmad Fadoliy, Wildan Munawar

Abstract


This study is intended to indicate that Indonesia's electoral system always experiences rapid dynamics in policy development. This study uses empirical normative legal research or a legal research method that uses a set of regulation relating to general elections and the rules of making positive law as reference of norms. Empirical research is also used to observe the results of human behavior in the form of physical archives. The methods are combined with the historical approach: an approach that is carried out by analyzing the debate arguments that occurred in the special committee meeting (Panitia Khusus) of the Election Draft Bill. The result of this research is the decision of the presidential threshold of 20% in the holding of presidential elections of 2019 contains the orthodox legal substance. This is because politically the law of its formation (Law No. 7 of 2017) is full of practical political interests of the ruling parties. Parties consisting of 6 factions gave a dominant opinion which leaned towards the 25% -30% threshold suggested by the government, while the other 4 factions do not agree with the high nomination threshold, because the concept of election must provide free space for each party to nominate their respective presidential candidates. The government had its own agenda to continue and extend the existing incumbent president and prevent the possibility for others. Therefore, in order to protect the agenda, high nomination threshold was proposed. Through content analyses of the regulation it can be stated that the high threshold has logical consequences for holding elections which create an insubstantial election environment and make the political climate in Indonesia unbalanced.

Keywords


Authoritarian law, law and politics, orthodox substance, presidential threshold

Full Text:

PDF

References


Anggoro, Syahriza Alkohir. (2019). Politik Hukum: Mencari Sejumlah Penjelasan. Jurnal Cakrawala Hukum, 10(1): 77-86. https://doi.org/10.26905/idjch.v10i1.2871.

Aritonang, Dinoroy Marganda. (2010). Penerapan Sistem Presidensil Di Indonesia Pasca Amandemen UUD 1945. Mimbar Hukum-Fakultas Hukum Universitas Gadjah Mada 22 (2), 391–407.

Asshiddiqie, J. (2008). Pokok-Pokok Hukum Tata Negara Indonesia Pasca Reformasi. Jakarta: Bhuana Ilmu Populer.

Bastian, S., Luckham, R., & Goetz, A. M. (2003). Can Democracy Be Designed?: The Politics of Institutional Choice in Conflict-Torn Societies. Zed Books.

Bayles, Michael D. (1982). Character, Purpose, and Criminal Responsibility. Law and Philosophy 1 (1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00143144.

Budiardjo, M. (2007). Fundamentals of Political Science. Jakarta: PT Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Budiardjo, Miriam. (2003). Dasar-Dasar Ilmu Politik. Jakarta: Gramedia Pustaka Utama.

Cain, Bruce E. (2012). ‘Teaching Election Law to Political Scientists’. . . Louis ULJ 56: 725.

Courtney, John and Smith, David. (2010). The Oxford Handbook of Canadian Politics. OUP USA.

Dahrendorf, Ralf. (1986). Konflik dan konflik dalam masyarakat industri: sebuah analisa-kritik. Jakarta: Rajawali Pers.

Dayanara, L. (2017). Relevansi Sistem Dalam Model Penyelenggaraan Pemilu Serentak. Semarang: Fakultas Hukum UNNES Semarang.

Diniyanto, A. (2018). Mengukur Dampak Penerapan Presidential Threshold di Pemilu Serentak Tahun 2019. Semarang: Jurnal UNNES.

Fogg, Karen. (2002). International Electoral Standards: Guidelines for Reviewing the Legal Framework of Elections. International Idea.

Halim, Abd. (2015). The Impact of Proportional Open System to Political Behavior:Case Study the Community Sumenep Madura in An Election Legislative 2014. Jurnal Humanity 9(2). http://ejournal.umm.ac.id/index.php/humanity/article/view/2387.

Hartono, Sunaryati. (1991). Politik Hukum Menuju Satu Sistem Hukum Nasional. Bandung: Alumni.

Kami, Indah Mutiara. (2017). ‘Sudah Disahkan, Ini 5 Isu Krusial Di UU Pemilu - Penelusuran Google’. 2017. https://www.google.com/search?safe=strict&sxsrf=ALeKk01469voIB4nU60fBwmwdL2Fa-fOaw%3A1598115574394&ei=9k5BX6XWF4HC3LUPu4iTmAo&q=Sudah+Disahkan%2C+Ini+5+Isu+Krusial+di+UU+Pemilu&oq=Sudah+Disahkan%2C+Ini+5+Isu+Krusial+di+UU+Pemilu&gs_lcp=CgZwc3ktYWIQAzIICCEQFhAdEB46BAgjECdQxrIdWMayHWD5tB1oAHAAeACAAfoBiAGaBZIBBTAuMy4xmAEAoAECoAEBqgEHZ3dzLXdpesABAQ&sclient=psy-ab&ved=0ahUKEwilqfy4pK_rAhUBIbcAHTvEBKMQ4dUDCAs&uact=5.

Mainwaring, Conley Professor of Political Science Scott, Scott

Mainwaring, Matthew Soberg Shugart, and Peter Lange. (1997). Presidentialism and Democracy in Latin America. USA: Cambridge University Press.

Marpaung, Lintje Anna. (2012). Pengaruh Konfigurasi Politik Hukum Terhadap Karakter Produk Hukum. Pranata Hukum, 7(1), 1-14.

Mayo, Henry Bertram. (1960). An Introduction to Democratic Theory. Oxford University Press.

MD, Mohammad Mahfud. (1993). Perkembangan politik hukum: studi tentang pengaruh konfigurasi politik terhadap produk hukum di Indonesia. Disertasi. Universitas Gadjah Mada.

MD, Mohammad Mahfud. (2006). Membangun Politik Hukum, Menegakkan Konstitusi. Jakarta: LP3ES.

Nasution, M. (2015). Politik Hukum Dalam Sistem Ketatanegaraan Indonesia. Medan: Puspantara.

Oetama, J. (2001). Suara Nurani: Tajuk Rencana Pilihan 1999-2001. Jakarta: Penerbit Buku Kompas.

Oman, S. (2016). Concepts and Theory of Social Movements. Malang: Intrans Publishing.

Overton, Spencer. (2013). Political Law. George Washington Law Review 81: 1783.

Perludem. (2020). ‘Perludem Uji Materi Ketentuan Ambang Batas Parlemen (Parliamentary Threshold)’. Diakses dari https://perludem.org/wp-conten/plugins/downloadattachments/includes/download.php?id=794.

Prasetyoningsih, Nanik. (2014). Dampak Pemilihan Umum Serentak Bagi Pembangunan Demokrasi Indonesia. Jurnal Media Hukum 21(2), 248.

Rahardjo, Satjipto. (2006). Menggagas Hukum Progresif Indonesia. Semarang: Pustaka Pelajar.

‘Risalah Rapat Pansus RUU Penyelenggaraan Pemilu (2017)’. 2017.

Shidarta. (2012). Mochtar Kusuma-Atmadja dan Teori Hukum Pembangunan Eksistensi dan Implikasi. Jakarta: HuMa dan Epistema Insititute.

Soedarto. (1983). Hukum Pidana dan Perkembangan Masyarakat Dalam Kajian Hukum Pidana. Bandung: Sinar Baru.

Soetjipto, Ani Widyani. (2014). Kerja untuk rakyat: buku panduan anggota legislatif. Depok: Puskapol.

Tanya, Bernard L. (2011). Politik hukum: agenda kepentingan bersama. Yogyakarta: Genta Publishing.

Thohari, A. Ahsin and Syaukani, Imam. (2006). Dasar-dasar politik hukum. Jakarta: RajaGrafindo Persada.

Thompson, Dennis Frank. (2000). Etika politik pejabat negara. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia.

Wisnewski, J. Jeremy. (2014). Torture, Terrorism, and the Use of Violence. Journal of Political Philosophy, 6 (1),

Yana, H. S. (2016). Politics of Expansion in Indonesia. Malang: UMM Press.

Zuhri, Sholehudin. (2018). PROSES POLITIK DALAM PEMBENTUKAN REGULASI PEMILU: Analisis Pertarungan Kekuasaan Pada Pembentukan Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 Tentang Pemilu. JWP (Jurnal Wacana Politik) 3 (2), 94–107.




DOI: https://doi.org/10.15575/politicon.v3i1.11523

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2021 JM Muslimin, Ahmad Fadoliy, Wildan Munawar

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.

Politicon: Jurnal Ilmu Politik received a Sinta 3 assessment based on the results of the Accreditation Number: No. 200 / M / KPT / 2020 (SINTA 3)

Flag Counter


1th Floor, Building of FISIP

Jl. Raya A.H. Nasution No. 105 Cibiru Kota Bandung, 40614

E-mail: journalpoliticon@uinsgd.ac.id

 

Lisensi Creative Commons

POLITICON : Jurnal Ilmu Politik  are licensed under Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International