Rethinking regional elections: Balancing efficiency and democracy

President Prabowo Subianto’s recent proposal to reconsider a revision of Indonesia’s regional election system, citing the need for economic efficiency, has sparked widespread debate. This initiative to explore alternatives to the direct election of regional leaders has prompted deeper questions about the country’s commitment to local democracy and the people’s right to directly choose their leaders.

Prabowo’s primary argument highlights the financial burdens associated with direct elections, and the political conflicts that often accompany them. While these concerns are valid to an extent, they are counterbalanced by fears that shifting away from direct elections could undermine fundamental democratic principles. This issue arises at a time when public dissatisfaction with increasingly centralized governance has grown, in stark contrast to the decentralization ideals that marked the beginning of Indonesia’s reform era.

The Crucible for Competent Leadership
Indonesia’s system of direct elections has proven instrumental in shaping the nation’s leadership landscape. It is through this mechanism that many prominent leaders, including President Joko Widodo, began their political journeys. Starting as a directly-elected mayor and governor, Jokowi’s rise to the presidency illustrates how direct elections have nurtured leaders with strong grassroots legitimacy.

However, despite these successes, public frustration with centralized governance has intensified. Critics argue that such centralization often prioritizes political agendas over the genuine needs of the public. While proponents of centralization may argue for streamlined decision-making, this approach risks eroding the quality of democracy and diminishing regional autonomy.

Direct elections, despite their imperfections, provide a platform for citizens to select leaders they believe can effect meaningful change. The system has consistently demonstrated its capacity to produce leaders with strong public support, ones capable of tackling pressing issues at both local and national levels. 

Leaders like Anies Baswedan, Ganjar Pranowo, and Gibran Rakabuming exemplify the potential of direct elections to foster individuals with the skills and vision to compete on the national stage.

Moreover, direct elections have empowered younger generations of leaders to emerge and contribute to governance with fresh perspectives. Figures such as Mochamad Nur Arifin in Trenggalek and Serena Cosgrova in Kupang represent a new wave of leadership that thrives on innovation and public engagement. This dynamic, which was notably absent during the tightly-controlled electoral processes of the New Order era, underscores the value of direct elections as a mechanism for fostering diverse leadership.

Challenges Facing Direct Elections
While direct elections have delivered many benefits, they are not without challenges. One of the most significant issues is the high cost of campaigning, which can make the electoral process vulnerable to transactional politics. Candidates often face immense financial pressure, which can lead to the practice of money politics and undermine the integrity of the democratic process.

In addition to financial challenges, weak oversight in certain regions has created opportunities for corruption and violations of electoral laws. These issues not only damage public trust in the system but also jeopardize the ability of elected leaders to govern effectively and ethically.

However, these challenges should not be seen as reasons to dismantle the system of direct elections. Instead, they highlight the need for targeted reforms to address the weaknesses, while preserving the system’s core democratic values.

Reforming the System
Rather than replacing direct elections with a closed system—such as leader selection by regional legislatures—Indonesia should focus on enhancing the transparency and accountability of the existing process. Reforms aimed at reducing campaign costs and curbing transactional politics are essential, to ensuring that elections remain a fair and equitable contest of ideas.

Strengthening institutional oversight is another critical step. By empowering independent electoral commissions and civic organizations to monitor the electoral process, the government can reduce the risks of corruption and ensure that elections are conducted in a manner that upholds democratic integrity.

In addition to institutional reforms, political education for the public should be prioritized. A well-informed electorate is better equipped to critically evaluate candidates and make decisions that reflect their aspirations and values. Such education initiatives can foster a more engaged and discerning voting population, ultimately leading to better governance outcomes.

Preserving Democratic Integrity
Direct elections are more than a mechanism for choosing leaders; they are a cornerstone of Indonesia’s democracy. They provide citizens with a voice in shaping policies and hold leaders accountable to the people they serve. This participatory process ensures that governance is grounded in the public’s interests, rather than being dictated solely by out-of-touch political elites.

Transitioning to a closed system, such as selection by regional legislatures, poses significant risks to democratic integrity. It diminishes the public’s role in governance, reducing accountability and potentially leading to a disconnect between leaders and their constituents. Such a system is also less likely to produce leaders with the broad legitimacy required to drive meaningful social and political change.

By retaining and reforming direct elections, Indonesia can uphold the democratic ideals that have guided its progress since the reform era. Comprehensive reforms that address the system’s shortcomings will not only preserve but also supercharge its effectiveness.
The debate over Indonesia’s regional election system is ultimately a debate about the nation’s democratic identity. 

While concerns about economic efficiency and political conflicts are valid, they must not overshadow the fundamental importance of preserving citizens’ political rights. Direct elections empower the public to participate actively in governance, fostering accountability and producing leaders capable of driving progress.

Rather than abandoning this mechanism, Indonesia must invest in reforms that address its challenges, while strengthening its democratic foundations. By doing so, the nation can ensure that its electoral system remains a robust and inclusive tool for advancing local and national development, safeguarding the principles of democracy for generations to come.

By: Eduardo Edwin Ramda (Policy Analyst)
Published on: Independent Observer, Friday, 7 February 2025.