https://apjed.or.id/perludem <p><em>Asia-Pacific Journal of Elections and Democracy </em>(<em>APJED</em>) is a multidisciplinary peer-reviewed journal discussing various aspects of elections and democratization in the region. <em>APJED</em> aims to develop a knowledge ecosystem that is relevant for academic communities, policymakers, and democracy activists.</p> <p><em>APJED</em> is managed by the Association for Election and Democracy (Perludem) and Djokosoetono Research Center of University of Indonesia, supported by the Asia-Pacific Regional Support for Election and Political Transition Program (Respect) USAID.</p> <p>Submissions are open year-round.<em> APJED </em>accepts original articles and book reviews.</p> <p>Before submitting, please ensure that the manuscript fits the aims and scope of<em> APJED</em> and author guidelines.</p> <p>All published manuscripts will be in English. </p> en-US [email protected] (All correspondence related to Asia-Pacific Journal of Elections and Democracy) [email protected] (Technical Support) Sat, 31 Dec 2022 00:00:00 +0700 OJS 3.3.0.6 http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss 60 https://apjed.or.id/perludem/article/view/27 <p>Indigenous communities in elections in Indonesia are very important for the legitimacy of the election results. The role of indigenous communities has often been used for voter participation. However, election organizers, political parties, and the government rarely discuss the role of indigenous communities as election monitors or supervisors. This article outlines how the involvement and civic engagement carried out by the Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) contributed to the participation of the Kalitanjung indigenous community in the supervision of the 2019 presidential and legislative elections. This study employs a qualitative method with data collection techniques through interviews and literature studies. The conclusion of the results of the study shows that the indigenous people of Kalitanjung have already obeyed norms, cultures, and traditions about behaving kindness according to the message of the <em style="color: #252525;">lelulur,</em> such as steadfast <em style="color: #252525;">waton</em> (obedient to the leader and the legitimate government), not <em style="color: #252525;">jumawa</em> (arrogant), not disbursing (taking the goods and rights of others), and being ready to die as cool as <em style="color: #252525;">urip</em> (can die at that time) if it violates the rules. They also respect state regulations in the form of election laws in their capacity as Indonesian citizens.</p> Yon Daryono, Wahju Gunawan, Ari Ganjar Herdiansah Copyright (c) 2023 Asia-Pacific Journal of Elections and Democracy https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 https://apjed.or.id/perludem/article/view/27 Tue, 19 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0700 https://apjed.or.id/perludem/article/view/34 <p>There were a few issues with how the General Election Commission (<em>Komisi Pemilihan Umum</em>, or KPU) followed up with the Election Supervisory Agency (<em>Badan Pengawas Pemilu</em>, or Bawaslu) in carrying out the dispute resolution for the 2020-2021 regional elections (<em>Pemilihan Umum Kepala Daerah</em>, or Pilkada). These issues were raised by the petitioners in their lawsuit before the Constitutional Court (<em>Mahkamah Konstitusi</em>, or MK). The petition suggests that there is a critical issue in the distribution of authority between Bawaslu and KPU. Similarly, the Court cannot resist adopting the KPU and Bawaslu's control over difficulties that continuously grow during elections. Reflecting on this situation, this study analyzes and investigates the KPU's and Bawaslu's positions of authority as the organizers of the regional election, as well as the Court's position regarding the follow-up to Bawaslu's recommendations. This is a normative legal study based on literature. The KPU and Bawaslu have equal jurisdiction in resolving administrative violations of the Regional Election. KPU decisions are founded on Bawaslu recommendations, and vice versa; Bawaslu suggestions constitute a type of control over the KPU before it goes through the decision-making process. The Court will decide whether or not to implement Bawaslu's suggestions on a case-by-case basis, based on the concept of benefit and prioritizing legitimacy and purity of voice, rather than rigidly applying the regulations.</p> titis anindya Copyright (c) 2022 Asia-Pacific Journal of Elections and Democracy https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0 https://apjed.or.id/perludem/article/view/34 Tue, 19 Sep 2023 00:00:00 +0700