KPU’s Removal of Disqualification Sanctions Deemed Inconsistent – 2024-08-06 09:51:58

KPU RI Building (Doc. MI)

THE Constitutional Democracy Initiative (Consid) considers the General Election Commission (KPU) to be inconsistent because it plans to remove the disqualification sanction for regional head candidate pairs who are late in reporting the Campaign Fund Receipt and Expenditure Report (LPPDK). This was revealed in the KPU Draft Regulation (RPKPU) concerning Campaign Funds for 2024 Pilkada Participants.

Instead, the KPU proposed sanctions in the form of not being allowed to participate in the campaign or not being inaugurated if the elected candidate pair has not submitted the LPPDK at all. The KPU argued that disqualification sanctions are not regulated by Law Number 10/2016 concerning Regional Elections.

However, Consid Chairman, Kholil Pasaribu, considered the KPU’s move inconsistent. This is because the sanctions in the form of campaign bans and postponement of inauguration that the KPU plans to implement also have unclear limits. For him, in addition to being less than optimal, the sanctions are also far from the principles of transparency and accountability.

“If it is stated that Article 75 of Law 10/2016 does not regulate sanctions for candidate pairs who do not submit LPPDK, there should be no need for any sanctions to be given at all,” said Kholil in a written statement, Tuesday (6/8).

He also explained that the elimination of sanctions for the cancellation of candidate pairs opens up space for election participants to receive donations indiscriminately. That, continued Kholil, has the potential to produce corrupt regional leaders.

In addition, the KPU’s move also further strengthens the public’s assessment that the KPU is not independent in drafting regulations and has minimal commitment to holding clean and anti-corruption regional elections. In fact, the disqualification sanction for regional election participants has been implemented since 2015.

“It is very strange and raises a big question about what is behind the KPU’s attitude in wanting to remove the provision on the grounds that it is not regulated in the Pilkada Law,” said Kholil. (J-2)

#KPUs #Removal #Disqualification #Sanctions #Deemed #Inconsistent

Share:

Facebook
Twitter
Pinterest
LinkedIn

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Recent Articles:

Table of Contents