DKPP: Seven KPU Members Violate Code of Ethics

KOMPAS/PRAYOGI DWI SULISTYO UNTUK KOMPAS

.

JAKARTA, KOMPAS – The Election Organization Ethics Council (DKPP) ruled on Wednesday (6/6/2018) that seven members of the General Elections Commission (KPU) had violated the election code of ethics. The KPU members were said to have given different treatment to political parties during the factual verification process for the 2019 general election.

The KPU said the DKPP ruling did not affect any of its own rulings in the registration of political parties for next year’s election. Nevertheless, the ruling serves as a warning for the KPU to evaluate and improve the quality of its work. The KPU said that it had corrected several of its rulings prior to the DKPP ruling.

Throughout the registration and verification for political parties participating in the 2019 elections, the Elections Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) has told the KPU to revise its rulings on three separate occasions. These include the registration process of nine political parties as election participants, and led to the Berkarya Party, the Garuda Party and the Crescent Star Party (PBB) being eligible to contest the election.

In April, the Jakarta State Administrative Court (PTUN) ruled that the KPU should revoke its ruling that the Indonesian Justice and Unity Party (PKPI) was ineligible to contest the election.

Warning

The DKPP has issued a warning for KPU members for the ethical code violation. Officials from the Republican Party, the Peaceful and Benign Islam Party (Idaman) and the People’s Party had lodged the complaint of ethical code violation.

The complaint was related to the registration, verification and approval of political parties contesting in next year’s election. The seven KPU members named in the complaint were KPU chair Arief Budiman and members Hasyim Asy’ari, Viryan, Pramono Ubaid Tanthowi, Wahyu Setiawan, Ilham Saputra and Evi Novida Ginting.

In a hearing led by DKPP member Muhammad, the KPU was ruled to have violated DKPP regulation No. 2/2017 on election code of ethics and organizing guide. The violated stipulations were related to principles of justice and professionalism.

DKPP member Teguh Prasetyo said that the KPU members had implemented two separate sets of procedures during the factual verification process of political parties seeking to contest next year’s election. First, the KPU used ruling No. 11/2017 as legal basis for the registration, verification and approval of political parties participating in the election. However, after the Constitutional Court (MK) revoked Article 173 Point (3) of the Election Law, resulting in all political parties having to go through another verification process, the KPU issued ruling No. 6/2018 to amend the earlier ruling.

“Substantially, both rulings are about the same thing, which is factual verification. However, the methods stipulated in the two rulings are different. Consequently, the factual verification processes the KPU did before and after the MK ruling are not the same,” Teguh explained.

The difference in the factual verification methods are deemed to have resulted in different level of difficulties in the verification process and different quality of verification results. This led to perceived unfair treatment among political parties seeking to contest next year’s election.

KPU chair Arief Budiman said that, after the MK issued its ruling, there was not enough time and regulation for the KPK to fully adhere to the MK ruling. At the time, in a joint consultation meeting with the government and House of Representatives, the KPU proposed to increase its personnel, budget and time. However, the proposal was not approved. Consequently, the KPU simplified its verification process without changing it substantially.

“We ensure that treatment was equal for all political parties. When the new KPU ruling was issued, all parties were told to adhere to it,” Arief said.

Nevertheless, Arief continued, the DKPP ruling served as a warning for KPU to evaluate its work. He also said that the DKPP ruling would not affect any of KPU’s rulings.

Election watchdog Association for Election and Democracy (Perludem) executive director Titi Anggraini said that the DKPP ruling would not affect the administration of next year’s election. However, this serves as a bad precedent for election organizing. Therefore, she said she hoped that the KPU could improve its performance and be more solid and professional. “In issuing regulations and rulings, the KPU should really consider aspects of fairness and integrity,” Titi said.

Apart from verification method, the DKPP also ruled that the KPU had violated another code of ethics as it had yet to register its Political Party Information System to the Communications and Informatics Ministry.

Apart from that, the DKPP said that, when the KPU declared that certain parties were ineligible to contest the election, it only issued a report (berita acara) instead of a ruling. The ruling was only issued after the official announcement of political parties participating in next year’s election. This obstructed certain political parties from challenging the ruling and affected the efficiency and effectiveness of election organizing.

(GAL)