PENYEDERHANAAN MEKANISME PELAKSANAAN

 PEMILU DAN PEMILUKADA DI INDONESIA

Oleh: Zulfikri Armada, Laode Syarif Indrawan, Nurul Millah

(Institut Pemerintahan Dalam Negeri)

Salah satu wujud pelibatan masyarakat dalam proses politik adalah terselenggaranya  pemilihan umum di suatu negara. Pemilu merupakan media bagi rakyat untuk dapat menyalurkan aspirasinya dalam menentukan figur dan arah kepemimpinan negara atau kepemimpinan daerah dalam satu periode tertentu. Di era globalisasi saat ini, demokratisasi merupakan salah satu agenda Dunia untuk mewujudkan pemerintahan yang representatif, efektif dan pro rakyat.

Demokrasi sebagaimana yang lazimnya kita fahami merujuk pada argumen dari Linclon (1963) by the people, rule the people and for the people[1]. Di dalam negara-negara yang mendasarkan dirinya atas demokrasi konstitusional, undang-undang dasar mempunyai fungsi yang khas yaitu membatasi kekuasaan pemerintah sedemikian rupa sehingga penyelenggaraan kekuasaan tidak bersifat sewenang-wenang. Dengan demikian diharapakan akan memberikan perlindungan terhadap hak-hak warga negara[2].

Implementasi nyata dalam pelaksanaan pemilu dapat kita temukan kepada pelaksanan Pemilihan Umum, Pemilihan Umum merupakan suatu sistem yang memberikan rakyat hak yang kuat dalam menentukan wakil-wakilnya baik di parlemen maupun di eksekutif sebagai kepala pemerintahan (pejabat politik).

Demokrasi di Indonesaia mengalami keterpasungan selaman puluhan tahun kurun era orde lama dan orde baru, dan antiklimaksnya pada tahun 1998 munculah geraka reformasi yang dimotori oleh para mahasiswa, reformasi timbul karena semangat untuk menciptakan pembaharuan di Indonesia. Ada 6 tuntutan utama masyarakat pada saat itu, yaitu Amandemen UUD1945; Pengahapusan doktrin Dwi Fungsi ABRI; Penegakan hukum, HAM, dan pemberantasan KKN, Otonomi Daerah; Kebebasan Pers; dan Mewujudkan Kehidupan Demokrasi.

Salah satu substansi penting pada Amandemen UUD 1945 adalah diberlakukannya sistem pemilhan Presiden secara langsung[3] melalui mekanisme pengajuan calon melalui partai politik atau gabunga partai politik peserta pemilu[4], yang kemudian secara lebih lanjut diatur dalam UU No.42 Tahun 2008 Tentang Pemilihan Umum.

Pada UU No.42 Tahun 2008 Proses pemilihan presiden di Indonesia dilaksanakan setelah pemilu legislatif digelar, dan dalam hal pengajuan pasangan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden oleh Parpol atau gabungan parpol, diberlakukannya syarat kepeilikan jumlah kursi di parlemen sebesar 20% atau memperoleh 25% dari suara sah nasional pemilu anggota DPR sebelum pemilihan Presiden dan Wakil Presiden. Mekanisme dan persyaratan pengajuan pasangan calon Presiden dan wakil Presiden ini tidak sejalan denga prisip sistem pemerintahan Presidensil yang dianut oleh Indonesia, sebagaimana yang dipersyaratkan oleh Montesque bahwa pemisahan eksekutif, legislatif dan yudikatif. Dalam artian seharusnya pemilahan presiden tidak memerlukan prasyarat ketercapaian kuota kursi di parlemen.

Praktik yang lazim di negara-negara penganut sistem presidensial adalah pemberlakuan ambang batas minimum bagi keterpilihan presiden. Dengan kata lain, konteks pemberlakuan presidential threshold bukanlah untuk membatasi pencalonan presiden, melainkan dalam rangka menentukan persentase suara minimum untuk keterpilihan seorang presiden. Dalam konteks Indonesia, prasyarat presidential threshold sudah sangat jelas dalam konstitusi. Pasal 6A ayat (3) UUD 1945 menegaskan bahwa, “Pasangan calon Presiden dan Wakil Presiden yang mendapatkan suara lebih dari lima puluh persen dari jumlah suara dalam pemilihan umum dengan sedikitnya dua puluh persen suara di setiap provinsi yang tersebar di lebih dari setengah jumlah provinsi di Indonesia, dilantik menjadi Presiden dan Wakil Presiden”.

Pola pemilu Presiden dan Wakil Presiden saat ini selain tidak konsisten dengan sistem Presidensil, sangat boros biaya, juga mengakibatkan instabilitas pemerintahan, karena pemilu legilatif dan eksekutif dilaksanakan secara parsial, sehingga mematikan kecerdasan berpolitik masyarakat. Seandainya pemilu legislatif dan eksekutif dilaksanakan serentak maka masyarakat dapat memilih presiden serta mendukung partai pengusung Capres/Cawapres yang ia dukung, sehingga stabilitas pemerintahan lebih tercapai.

Dalam tuntutan pelaksanaan otonomi daerah dan mewujudkan kehidupan yang demokratis, maka lahir lah UU No.22 Tahun 1999 yang kemudian direvisi menjadi UU 32 Tahun 2004 tentang pemerintahan daerah, yang didalamnya diatur mengenai sistem pemilihan kepala daerah dan wakil kepala daerah secara langsung baik pada tingkat Provinsi maupun Kabupaten/Kota[5].

Secara teoritis Pelaksanaan pilkada secara langsung dan pemilihan anggota DPRD merupakan salah satu syarat utama terwujudnya pemerintahan daerah yang akuntabel, akomodatif dan responsif (Smith, 1985; Arghiros, 2001). Pemilihan secara langsung ini memberikan kedudukan politis yang kuat bagi kepala daerah terhadap DPRD, seperti pola ”strong mayor” di Amerika Serikat (USA) dan ”Oberbuergermeister” di Jerman.  Hal ini juga sejalan dengan amanat konstitusi Pasal 22E ayat (1) Undang-Undang Dasar 1945 yang menegaskan soal penyelenggaraan pemilihan umum secara langsung, umum, bebas, rahasia, jujur dan adil. Asas langsung dimaknai publik secara langsung memberikan suaranya menurut hati nuraninya tanpa perantara dan tanpa tingkatan.

Konsekuensi dari rumusan ayat tersebut dengan keadan Indonesia sekarang yang memiliki 34 Provinsi, 417 Kabupaten dan 94 Kota[6] timbulnya beberapa permasalahan serius, yaitu, pertama, tingginya ongkos demokrasi. Berdasarkan catatan Fatah (2008)[7], pemilukada dilaksanakan rata-rata setahun kurang lebih 103 kali[8]. Dari sisi ongkos pemilukada, menurut Jusuf Kalla (2008), setiap tahun negara menganggarkan biaya kurang lebih 200 triliun[9].

Imbas lain dari kesalahan sistem pilkada adalah terciptanya oligarki kekuasaan di daerah, dan munculnya politisi “haji mumpung”, Keluarga Ratu Atut di Prov.Banten dan Keluarga Syahrul Yasin Limpo di Sulawesi Selatan merupakan bentuk nyata dari oligarki kekuasaan elit di daerah. Hal ini terjadi karena jadwal Pilkada yang tidak serentak, sehingga memberikan kesempatan yang luas kepada seseorang yang terlebih dahulu terpilih menjadi kepala daerah untuk mendorong keluarganya maju pada pemilihan kepala daerah di daerah lain. Muncul juga calon yang setelah gagal pada Pilkada disatu daerah mencoba lagi peruntungannya di daerah lain.

Anomali antara teori dan praktik penyelenggaran dalam konteks pemilukada terjadi karena kesalahan konsep Pemilu kita yang memiliki banyak sekali celah dan kekurangan. Kita sepakat bahwa membangun demokrasi adalah suatu keharusan, akan tetapi yang lebih penting lagi adalah membangun bangsa (nation building), agar Indonesia mampu menjadi Negara yang maju, cerdas, sejahtera, aman, dan terhindar dari berbagai konflik. Penataan ulang kembali pelaksaan Pemilu merupakan suatu kebutuhan bagi Indonesia, agar energi bangsa tidak terkuras setiap hari hanya untuk mengurusi persoalan pemilu.

Pilkada dan Disharmonisasi Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional-Daerah

Pemilu di Indonesia yang dilaksanakan terpisah-pisah dan tidak terjadwal dengan baik menciptakan problema serius pada tingkat lokal maupun nasional, salah satunnya yaitu tidak berkesinambungannya perencanaan pembangunan pada tingkat nasional dan daerah.

Menurut Conyers & Hills (1994), perencananaan didefinisikan sebagai suatu proses yang berkesinambungan yang mencakup keputusan-keputusan atau pilihan-pilihan berbagai alternatif penggunaan sumber daya untuk mencapai tujuan-tujuan tertentu pada masa yang akan datang. dari definisi Conyer & Hills tersbut jelas bahwa dalam proses perencanaan diperlukan kesinambungan dalam pengambilan kebijakan guna peroleh hasil yang maksimal. Dalam konteks perencanaan pembangunan di Indonesia maka dengan sistem desentralisasi saat ini maka Pemda diberikan kewenangan untuk merekonseptualisasikan model perencanaan pembanganunan sesuai dengan kondisi yang ada di tiap-tiap daerah otonom. Akan tetapi proses perencaan tersebut tetap saja harus mendukung dan berkesinambungan dengan perencanaan pembangunan Nasional.

Berdasarkan konsep pembangunan nasional, perencanaan daerah dan penganggaran daerah merupakan bagian yang tak terpisahkan dari (proses) manajemen strategis, dimana dalam proses formalnya diawali oleh penyusunan rencana strategis (renstra).  Dengan demikian, dalam aplikasinya di sektor publik, penganggaran daerah (juga) dikaitkan dengan renstra daerah. Dalam khazanah tata urutan konstitusi, “renstra daerah”, merupakan bagian dari “renstra nasional” untuk memenuhi tujuan-tujuan strategis dan tujuan nasional/negara sebagaimana tertuang dalam UUD 1945[10].

Secara sederahana alur perencanaan pembangunan kami sajikan dalam bagan alur 1 berikut ini (berdasarkan UU No.25/2004):

Dari bagan alur mekanisme perencanaan pembangunan tersebut jelas bahwa sistem perencanaan pembangunan nasional merupakan satu kesatuan tata cara perencanaa pembangunan untuk menghasilkan rencana pembangunan jangka panjang, jangka menengah, dan tahunan yang dilaksanakan oleh unsur penyelenggara pemerintahan dipusat dan daerah dengan melibatkan partisipasi masyarakat. Dengan kata lain, dalam rangka penyelenggaraan pemerintahan daerah, perencanaan pembangunan daerah merupakan subsistem dari pernecanaa pembangunan nasional sehingga disusunlah pernecanaan pembangunan daerah tersebut sebagai satu kesatuan dalam sistem pernecanaan pembangunan nasional.

Permalasalahan yang terjadi adalah realitas dilapangan berkata sebaliknya. Akibat sistem pemilu kita yang tidak terjadwal dengan baik, terjadi disharmonisasi perencanaan pembangunan tingkat pusat-daerah. Hal ini terjadi akibat perbedaan periodesasi masa jabatan kepemimpinan politik anatara pimpinan eksekutif di pusat dan didaerah yang berbeda-beda. Semisal Presiden yang terpilh pada tahun 2005 telah menetapkan RPJM Nasional tahun 2005-2010, sedangkan satu daerah yang baru selesai melaksanakan Pilkada tahun 2008 akan menyusun RPJM 2008-2013, yang berbeda pula dan tidak mengakomodir keberlanjutan perncanaan pembangunan yang telah ditetapkan oleh kepala daerah periode sebelumnya, hal ini menciptakan missing link antara perencanaan pembangunan nasional dan daerah.

Salah satu indikasi adanya ketidaksingkronan perencanaan pembangunan Pemerintah  dan Pemerintah Daerah adalah, diluncurkannya program Master Plan Perencanaan Pembangunan Ekonomi Indonesia (MP3EI) oleh Kementrian Koordinator Bidang Perekonomian.

Sebagai dokumen kerja, MP3EI berisikan arahan pengembangan kegiatan ekonomi utama yang sudah lebih spesifik, lengkap dengan kebutuhan infrastruktur dan rekomendasi perubahan/revisi terhadap peraturan perundang-undangan yang perlu dilakukan maupun pemberlakuan peraturan-perundangan baru yang diperlukan untuk mendorong percepatan dan perluasan investasi[11]

MP3EI sebenarnya tidak perlu dilakukan jika saja perencanaan pembangunan nasional dan daerah dapat bersinergi dan berjalan dengan baik, selain itu MP3EI tidak konsisten dengan semangat otonomi daerah yang terkandung dalam UU No.32/2004.

SOLUSI

Dari pemaparan diatas ada beberapa permaslahan pokok yang terjadi akibat mekanisme Pemilu yang kita gunakan saat ini, antara lain:

1.      Inkonsistensi sistem presidensil, dan instabilats pemerintahan. Karena pengajuan Capres/Cawapres bergantung kepada hasil perolehan kursi legislatif yang telah dilaksanakan terlebih dahulu.

2.      Pemilukada Provinsi dan Kabupaten/Kota yang waktu pelaksanaannya tidak serentak,  menggerogoti Keuangan Negara dan menganggu porsi belanja publik di daerah.

3.      Munculnya tren politik dinasti atau oligarki kekuasaan pada tingkat pusat dan daerah.

4.      Disharmonisasi perencanaan pembangunan nasional dan daerah.

Salah satu solusi logis untuk menjawab permasalahan diatas adalah melalui upaya penataan ulang pelaksanaan Pemilu di Indonesia. Pentaan ulang yang kami maksudkan adalah penyederhanaan pelaksanaan Pemilu yang lebih efektif, efisien, serta mampu menghadirkan output pemerintahan yang baik dan handal.

Pada saat ini kita mengenal denga tiga kali penyelenggaraan pemilu, yaitu pemilihan legislatif, presiden, dan kepala daerah, akan tetapi jika kita bedah lebih dalam lagi kemungkinan penyelenggaran pemilu  saat ini bisa sampai 7 (tujuh) kali dalam 5 tahun[12], yang secara psikologis dapat menciptakan kebosanan masyarkat hingga angka partisipasi Pemilu menjadi rendah. Selain itu pola seperti ini sangat boros anggaran.

Oleh karena itu kia dapat menyederhanakan penyelenggaran pemilu menjadi dua momentum saja, yang pertama Pemilu Presiden dan Pemilu legislatif yang dislenggaran serentak dalam satu hari-H, kemudia Pemilu Kepala Daerah Provinsi, Kabupaten, dan Kota serentak se-Indonesia.

Selain penghemantan anggaran hal penting lainnya adalah tersiptanya Stabilitas dan efektivitas pemerintahan pascapemilu inilah yang menjadi dasar pelaksanaan pemilu serentak (Mark Pyane dkk, 2002). Konsep dan desain ini lahir berdasarkan pengalaman negara-negara Amerika Latin yang menggunakan sistem pemerintahan presidensial, tetapi justru jalannya pemertihanan menjadi tidak stabil akibat pertikaian antara presiden terpilih dengan parlemen yang mayoritas anggotanya tidak berasal dari partai presiden atau partai koalisi pendukung presiden.

Pemilu serentak mulai diterapkan di Brazil sejak awal 1994 dan berhasil menstabilkan dan mengefektifkan pemerintahan, sehingga dalam kurun 15 tahun kemudian, Brasil menjadi kekuatan ekonomi dunia. Sukses Brasil kemudian diiukuti oleh negara-negara lain di kawasan tersebut.

Mengapa pemilu serentak yang menggabungkan pemilu legislatif dan pemilu eksekutif dapat menciptakan kekuatan legislatif dan eksekutif yang kongruen? Shugart (1996) bilang, pemilu serentak menimbulkan coattail effect, di mana keterpilihan calon presiden akan mempengaruhi keterpilihan calon anggota legislatif. Maksudnya, setelah memilih calon presiden, maka pemilih secara cerdas akan cenderung memilih partai politik atau koalisi partai politik yang mencalonkan presiden yang dipilihnya.

Dalam hal Oligarki kekuasaan didaerah, dengan melaksanakan pemilu secara serentak. Merupakan solusi yang aplikatif dapat mencegah terjadi politik dinasti. Apalagi memang dalam sistem pemerintahan presidensil dapat diaplikasikan pemilu serentak. Yang mana eksekutif dan legislatif dipilih  secara langsung oleh rakyat. Berbeda dengan sistem pemerintahan parlementer, pilihan eksekutif ditentukan oleh pilihan legislatif yang menjadi pemenang  pemilu dan menguasai mayoritas kursi parlemen. Dengan melakukan desain ulang terhadap waktu penyelenggaraan pemilu dapat dipetik beberapa keuntungan.

Pertama, desain pemilu secara serentak. Dengan pemilu yang bersamaaan antara pemilu legisltif dan eksekutif. Dapat mempertegas sistem presidensil yang kita anut, secara dapat mereduksi praktek politik transaksional, dan pragmatis antara eksekutif dan legislatif. Karena sedari awal partai politik sudah menguatkan barisan koalisinya, agar terpilih Capres yang diusungnya. Pada saat yang  sama Presiden juga tidak akan “menguras tenaga” membangun koalisi jika terpilih. Bangunan koalisi yang ideal yang dapat mengatrol dan mendukung kebijakan eksekutifpun pada titik ini. Terbangun dalam format koalisi yang proporsional. Bukan lagi format koalisi yang rapuh atau format koalisi obesitas, yang pada akhirnya tidak efekif dan kabinetpun disesaki oleh menteri-menteri yang ditempatkan karena politik transaksional dan pragmatis, sehinnga dapat menghambat efektifitas penyelenggaran pemerintahan.

Kedua, penyelenggaraan pemilu serentak pemilu legislatif dan pemilu eksekutif bisa dikongkritkan dan akan menghemat uang negara yang tidak sedikit. Karena selama ini pos terbesar dalam pengeluaran dana biaya pemilu adalah pada honorarium petugas pemilu, yaitu sebanyak 65 persen biaya pemilu, yang harus dibayarkan setiap kegiatan pemilu. Kalau dalam kurun lima tahun hanya terjadi dua kali kegiatan pemilu, yakni pemilu legislatif dan pemilu eksekutif serta pemilu kepala daerah, dana negara yang digunakan untuk membiayai pemilu bisa ditekan sampai tiga atau empat kali lipat.

ketiga, karena pemilu yang dilaksanakan hanya satu kali dalam satu periode (lima tahun). Maka secara otomatis akan menghalangi niat dan politik para kerabat, untuk melanggengkan anggota keluarganya, mengganti kedudukannya yang dijabati saat itu. Logikanya bagaimana mungkin menggiring angota keluarganya kedalam lingkatan kekuasaan dengan posisi yang ia miliki. Kalau pada waktu mencalonkan dirinya sebagai pejabat eksekutif terkendala dengan batasan waktu. Kondisi ini juga sejatinya akan memaksimalkan kinerja anggota legislatif. Agar tidak mencalonkan lagi sebagai kepala daerah di provinsi, kabupaten  atau kota. Kita bisa membandingkan kondisi yang terjadi sekarang, setiap orang pada memburu kursi DPR, DPD, dan DPRD. Mereka yang sudah merebut kursi diparlemen maupun yang gagal, bergerak ke bawah berebut jatah kursi kepala daerah. Bagi pemilik kursi yang telah merasakan kursi empuk senayan, jika berhasil menjadi kepala daerah, akan meninggalkan kursinya untuk orang lain, yang boleh jadi adalah  kerabatnya sendiri. Sementara yang kalah pada pemilu legislatif memiliki tempo/jeda untuk kembali meraih kursi jabatan eksekutif sebagai kepala daerah. Sehingga praktek “Haji mumpung” dapat kita hapuskan dan mati dengan sendirinya jika pola Pemliu serentak ini kita terapkan

Mengenai penjadwalan ulang adalah bagaimana menata ulang jadwal pilkada yang berserakan agar kekosongan masa jabatan kepala daerah tidak menimbulkan instabilitas politik lokal. Sesungguhnya, instabilitas politik lokal bisa terjadi apabila kekosongan masa jabatan kepala daerah itu tidak didesain sebelumnya. Namun jika sedari awal sudah direncanakan dan diumumkan, maka kekosongan masa jabatan kepala daerah akibat penataan jadwal pilkada tidak perlu dikhawatirkan. Pemerintah dalam hal ini Kementrian Dalam Negri dapat mendisain payung hukum yang mengatur masalah penunjukan Pejabat pengisi kekosongan jabatan kepala daerah akibat dari penjadwalan ulang pelaksanaan Pilkada serentak ini.

Keempat, Dengan penataan ulang jadwal Pilkada maka harmonisasi perencanaan jangka panjang, menengah dan tahunan antara pemerintah dan pemerintah daerah dapat dioptimalkan, sehingga tidak perlu lagi pemerintah membuat program MP3EI untuk mengakselerasi pertumbuhan ekonomi di Indonesia, karena semuanya sudah tertuang didalam RPJP nasional. Meskipun kementrian koordinator bidang eknomi mengatakan bahwa MP3EI bukan dimaksudkan untuk mengganti dokumen perencanaan pembangunan yang telah ada seperti Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Panjang Nasional 2005 – 2025 (UU No. 17 Tahun 2007) dan Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Menengah Nasional, akan tetapi pada tahap pelaksanaannya akan bertentangan dengan semangat otonomi daerah karena MP3EI sendiri merupakan wujud dari ketidakpercayaan pemerintah kepada pemerintah daerah untuk mampu mengakselerasi pembangunan infrastruktur dan ekonomi di daerahnya, sehingga akan muncul tarik-ulur asas-asas otonomi daerah yang seharusnya dijalankan sebagai konsensus yang telah kita putuskan bersama.

2019	2020	2024
Pemilu Presiden dan Pemilu Legislatif	Pemilihan Kepala Daerah Provinsi, Kabupaten dan Kota Serentak se Indonesia
Eksekutif dan Leegislatif Nasional menyusun RPJM Nasional, berisi kangkah strategis percepatan pembangunan di Indonesia, baik aspek pembanungan fisik (ifrastruktur) mapun non fisik (regulasi, SDM, dsb)	Harmonisasi dan sinkronisasi pelaksanaan dokumen RPJM Nasional-Daerah

Untuk proyek-proyek infrastruktur strategis dapat dilempahkan kepada daerah melalui intensifikasi dan transfer apakah itu DAU ataupun DAK, sehingga pemerintah daerah apat terlibat aktif dalam perencanaan pembangunan strategis nasional mapun daerah, dan hal ini hanya akan mungkin terlaksana apabila periodisasi kepemimpinan nasional dan daerah seragam, sehingga tidak akan muncul dokumen perencanaan pembangunan baru ditengah pelaksanaan perencanaan pembangunan nasional yang telah ada.

Pada akhirnya keseriusan dan ketegasan pemrintah kita nantikan dalam menyikapi kesemerawutan pelaksanaan Pemilu di Indonesia. Penyederhanaan dan penataan waktu pelaksaan merupakan opsi logis yang segera harus diambil, agar permasalahan-permasalahan yang muncul akibat dari ketidakberesan sistem pemilu kita tidak terus-menerus terjadi, yang dalam waktu lama akan menjadi bom waktu bagi keberlangsungan bangsa dan negara ini.

---

[1] Dielaborasi kembali oleh Ryaas Rasyid dalam Makna Pemerintahan, Tinjauan dari Segi Etika dan Kepemimpinan, Yarsif Watampone, 2002, hal.39

[2] Drs. Astim Riyanto, SH., MS. (2000). Teori Konstitusi. Bandung: Penerbit YAPEMDO. Hal 336

[3] Pasal 6A ayat (1) UUD 1945

[4] Pasal 6A ayat (2) UUD 1945

[5] Pada uu 32 tahun 2004 pasal 56 ayat (1) disebutkan bahwa Kepala daerah dan Wakil kepala daerah dipilih dalam satu pasangan calon yang dilaksanakan secara demokratis berdasarkan asas langsung, umum, bebas, rahasia, jujur dan adil.

[6] Data sampai diundangkannya UU No.16 Tahun 2013 tentang Pembentukan Kabupaten Musi Rawas Utara di   Provinsi Sumatera Selatan

[7] Eep Saeful Fatah, bahan ceramah dalam seminar Konsolidasi Demokrasi oleh MIPI

[8] Artinya, dengan logika sederahana, setiap satu bulan ada kurang lebih 8 pemilukada, dalam seminggu ada 2 kali pemilukada, atau setiap 3 hari rata-rata di Indonesia terdapat satu kali pemilukada

[9] Jusuf Kalla, Republika, 2008

[10] Dijelaskan oleh Sony Yuwono dkk, dalam buku memahami APBD dan Permasalahannya (Panduan Pengelolaan Keuangan Daerah)

[11] Dikutip dalam buku Masterplan Percepatan dan Perluasan Pembangunan Ekonomi Indonesia, diterbitkan Kementerian Koordinator Bidang Perekonomian

[12] Pemilu Legislatif, Pemilu Presiden putaran I, Pemilu Presiden Putaran II, Pilkada Provinsi putran I, Pilkada Provinsi putaran II, Pilkada Kabupaten putran I, Pilkada Kabupaten Putaran II

INDONESIA DECENTRALIZATION:

DIRECT LOCAL ELECTION VS PUBLIC SERVICES DELIVERY

Nurliah Nurdin

Dr.Nurliah Nurdin,S.Sos, MA is a lecture in Institute of Local Government Affairs,

ABSTRACT

It is the function of government to provide public utilities and services. Citizen could argue whether their government really work or not strictly by having the basic need of society provided, such as health care, cheap or even free education, easily to find a job, safety and confort pedestarian, clean and healthy environment, and reliable public transportation. Two bills of Indonesia decentralization have been implemented as decentralization becomes the most important global trends of the new century, yet there is still no consensus on how to design political institutions to realize its benefits. In other side, centralization has been blamed to prolong the nation services during Soeharto Era. However, in remote regions and specific sectors, decentralization has meant aweaker state, more clientelism, and continued environmental destruction. Aconceptual puzzle by academics by question how to have Indonesia decentralization benefit both nation soveregnty and people need fulfilled. To have a strong decentralization on public need, is a institutional work among executive,legislative and judicative at the national level. Further, surveilance on how local election has a strong impact on the public services delivery. Three focuses of this paper are : institutionalism of decentralization, the influences of local election to the decentralization, and Local election’s perfomance on Public Services. Data and respondens are gathered since 2011-2012 as the writer become a research expert on Grand Design of Regional Autonomy cooperated between Minister of Home Affairs and the World Bank and The Advisory Board of President on Reformation of Government and Bureaucracy.

Key words: Decentralization, direct local election, public services.

Introduction

Decentralization in Indonesia has been written in the beginning of independence. Article 18 of the 1945 Constitution provided for the creation, maintenance and development of local governments in Indonesia and for the enactment of a local government act. Then, law concerning local government in Indonesia was Act Number 5 of 1974, which was entitled Governance at Regional Level (hereinafter referred to as the Local Government Act of 1974). This title is intended to indicate that the territorial division and sub divisions of Indonesia were not only administered locally, but also nationally as well as jointly. The entire territory of the Republic of Indonesia was divided and sub divided with regards to the principle of deliberation and consensus in administration and the traditional rights of the regions that have a special character according to the Constitution. This last provision is concerned with the great diversity of people constituting the Indonesian nation. The different ethnic cultural groups not only have their own customs and dresses, but even languages, cultures and attitudes that vary from one part of the country to another. This diversity enriches Indonesia's unity.

Following the reformation momentum, the regional autonomy law No 22 Year 1999 and law of Finance No. 25 in 1999, Indonesia has seriously implementing the regional authomoy law and the Finances Policy. However, some problems have occured that make the goals of regional authonomy to increase public interest fulfilled and public services were not provided as a expectation of decentralization. Then the revision of regional autonomy law has born Law No 32 year of 2004 which is implemented as a better version of the previous law. Nonetheles, the decentralization still emerge some problems expecially on the public services delivery. Further, direct local election that enacted in 2005 as expected to be local participation to increase the democracy values as well to provide a better public services seems to ruin the goals of decentralization. Beside consumpt local and national budget to conduct election, direct local election has openly risen new problems such as local conflict that tend to be a massive demonstration, riots and violences among candidates’s supportes, cultural and social unrest, politization of bureucracy, the use of public budget for supporting the election, the attention of elected head of region for public concerns were left out and the concern of reelected and secure the position is mostly the elites focuses instead of guaranttee the public services. This paper is written to explore on decentralization and local election, how they are interrelated to increase public services and how local election has partly ruined the decentralization. How is the decentralization and local election has a negative impact on public services delivery. To answer the question, some studies present on decentralization concept, local election concept, the fact of Indonesia decentralization and the relation of decentralization and local election in providing public services institutionalism of decentralization, the influences of local election to the decentralization, and Local election’s perfomance on Public Services.

A. Institutionalism of Decentralization

Generally, decentralization has been perceived as a transfer of authority from central government to local government with the aims to implement closer the public

services delivery. Decentralization basically is a reduce of authority of central government to the provincial and local government. Expecting to be closer to their constitutient then local election was also held in Indonesia since 2005. The Regional Autonomy Laws No 25 year of 1999 and the extended revision Laws No 32 Year of 2004 were intended to have a better local government performance in building their own regions. In other words, these laws were meant to solve regional and local problems which will free central government from spending much time and energy dealing with local problems; such as number of schools needed, hospital, road, and any public utilities. It is expected that the central government will focus thinking on strategy and supervisory, to deal with globalization issues and to provide and promote the best need of the country. to maintain the national integration and most important is to guide, to supervise, to guard and to control the implementation of decentralization.

Related to this authority transfer, a working paper of UNDP and Germany also proposed a definition of decentralization as stated below:

“....decentralization or decentralization governance , refers to the restructuring or reorganization of authority so that there is a system of co-responsibility between institutions of governance at the central, regional and local levels according to the principle of subsidiarity, thus increasing the overall quality and effectiveness of the system of governance, while increasing the authority and capacities of subnational levels...... Decentralization could also be expected to contribute to key elements of good governance, such as increasing people’s opportunitinies for participation in economic, social and political decisions, assisting in developing peoples capacities; and enhancing government responsiveness, transparancy and accountabulity

Indonesia actually has law of decentralization year of 1974, somehow under President of Soeharto rule, the strong centralization of any lives of government was applied. Then, riot and demand for reformation happened in 1998, the heaviest strikes ever occured in Indonesia that parliament stood to step down President Soeharto. The flows of reformation then insist in four areas of changes, namely : law enforcement, civil-military relation; regional autonomy and a support for economic development. When Presiden Habibie replaced President Soeharto, there have been tremendous changes have been made to answer people demand. One of the system changed is the regulation of regional autonomy. Somehow, due to the lack of supervisory from the central government, the decentralization has been applied in different perspectives, not only among local governments, power relation between local government and provincial level but also central government and local government. For example, the head of Kabupaten/Kota make government organizations more than the actual need.

There is proposition that electoral incentives can play a central role in the success of decentralized delivery of local public goods. The presence of formal local institutions, particularly electoral rules that enable voters to reward and punish locally-elected officials, is key for reaping the benefits that decentralization can provide. When constitutional rules do not support electoral accountability, introducing other mechanisms of political rewards and citizen control becomes all the more important.

However, making local government organizations without a necessity assesment only consume local revenue and budget including to pay all the officials expenses. As the impacts, so many program for public services were abandoned due to the insufficient budget, for example training for physician and nurses, training for teachers, local economic empowernment, and other program for public benefits.21Therefore, the law of regional autonomy in 1999 was revised and the law of decentralization 2004 become more details in what ares that the local government response for and what is the central government obligation. As stated in UNDP-Germany research recommendation below, decentralization essentially for the much benefit for the local public services.

 “.... while decentralization or decentralization governance should not be seen as an end in itself, it can be a means for creating more open, responsive and effective local government and for enhancing representational system of community—level decision making. By allowing local communities and regional entities to manage their own affairs and though facilitating closer contact between central and local authorities, effective system of local governance enable responses to people’s needs and priorities to be heard, thereby ensuring that government interventions to meet variety of social needs. The implementation of strategies is therefore increasing to require decentralized, local participatory processes to identify and address priority objectives for poverty reduction, employment creation, gender equity and environmental regeneration22

This statement clarifies that decentralization is not enough by only transferring authorities to the local government. It needs further participation of local society to make decision. The system should assure that the effective local government is to enable responses of people need. Therefore as one package of decentralization is to count local society participation in the decision making process. It is no longer applicable for any public decision inclusively only determined by elites without people’s concern.

Role of Central Government vs Local Government

Eventhough the practice of local governance in Indonesia has made progress since the reform period, as a enactment of Law No. 22 of 1999 onRegional Government. The relationship between central and local governments become more decentralized, except six powers that remain in the central government, most of the authority delegated to the regions in the field of governance. In general, the law No. 22 Year 1999 on Regional Government has a lot to bring progress to the region and also for the improvement of people's welfare.

The balance of power between central and local government is matter to improve the lives of local society and communities. If there is balance of power between central and local government lies, then there lies the responsibilities and accountabilities for the delivery of improvement. A need for central government to set and monitor national strategic goals, while local government must have its own autonomy to shape the development of their communities. However, as it is also statad in the research done by the World Bank, that the actual balance between central and regional authority is not justabout a conscious division of labour but also about concrete struggles overpolitical and economic resources as illustrated in Indonesia, where decentralizationhas resulted in confusion about the distribution of power andauthority between different levels of government. Rather than a technicalgovernance issue, the confusion stems from a tug of war between competinginterests which has a concrete, material basis.

In the Central government, powerful coalitionsretain a vested interest in maintaining some controlover local resources and authority over taxes, royalties and investmentpolicy, while attempting to balance this against aspirations for greaterlocal autonomy. On the other hand, local elites (especially at the subprovinciallevel) are intent on taking direct economic control, typicallyciting the injustice of past practices that allowed Jakarta to exploitIndonesia’s vast riches. In the meantime, provincial authorities are stuckin the middle, struggling to retain some power and not to fall into theoblivion of political and administrative redundancy. The result: ratherthan breaking up centralized state intervention and promotinginvestment,decentralization has so far opened the door to a host of uncertainties whichfrighten investors.

Further, the research also stated for cautions that decentralization ‘may not always be efficient, especially forstandardized, routine, network-based services’. It can also ‘result in the lossof economies of scale and control over scarce financial resources by thecentral government’. In fact a central theme has been a wariness that ‘weakadministrative or technical capacity at local levels may result in servicesbeing delivered less efficiently and effectively in some areas of the country’

central government only has six powers over the local government, they are Foreign Relations; Defense; Security; Judicial; Monetary andFiscal; Religion. On the other hand, local government has been transferred 31 decentralization authorities in addition to 8 optional authorities. Having that lots of authorities supposedly make the local governments worked more with establishing downward accountability to citizen levels.

Further the authorities make the local government perform the public goods levels maximized under decentralization. Centralization, on the other hand, produces the surplus maximizing public goods levels only if the districts are identical. Thus, with identical districts, decentralization dominates when spillovers are small and dentralization dominates when spillovers are large. With non-identical districts, decentralization is still better when spillovers are small.

One of the most important matters in decentralization is the accountability from local elected governments to the central government level. Transfer of expenditures and political responsibility to the local authorities may be supported to alleviate the burdens on the central government. It may also be a means of more revenue generation by mobilising more local resources. This means that decentralisation can be a “win‐win situation” for both central and local governments. Decentralisation processes may simply provide positive development and democratisation options which a centralised governmental system does not offer

.

Chart 1. Indonesia Central and Loval Government Authorities

Central Government 6 Authorities

Provincial Government, Local Government/Municipality: 31 Decentralization Authorities + 8 Optional Authorities

6powers in the Central Government: Foreign Relations; Defense; Security; Judicial; Monetary andFiscal; Religion

31 Compulsary Action: Social environment; Trade;Marine and Fisheries; Forestry; Education; Health; SMEs; Workers & Transmigration;Farms and Estates Mining; Transportation; Investment; Culture and Tourism; Population; Empowerment of Women; Family Planning and Family Welfare; Industry;PU;Management of space; Youth and Sports; Information and Communication; Housing; Archives; Defense; The Unity of Nation and Politicsl; Statistics;PUM; PMD; Personnel; Library ProposedAction: Marine and Fisheries; Agriculture; Forestry Energy and Mineral Resources;Tourism;Industry;Trade, and Transmigration

B. The Influence of Local Election to Decentralization

Local direct election in Indonesia has been implemented as extension of local government laws ( No 32 Year of 2004) to make the public services and local interest closely implemented.It was firstly applied in regency of Kutai Kartanegara in June 2005. One year after the first direct election for president and the house of represnetative member. As written in dictionary of babylon, election is one way to make the public services closer to the need of people. Having local executives and legislatives are elected directly supposedly make the relation of member of representatives and their constituents

of no boundaries. In other words, people’s need and interest can be easily heard by the representative and as outputs to increase people’s prosperity.

Election is the process of voting in order to select one person from a specific group to perform certain duties in a government, society or corporation. Local elections are the elections held for the purpose of choosing representatives for local government or for a county council, town or city. Elections can also be held for the purpose of deciding a state public question.

Somehow, as mentioned before, local election and decentralization have made the bureucracy in patology which is only serve for elites in power. There is a swift corruption from central government to the local government to the broad power wealth management and financial areas as well as "money politics" that occur in local elections.

The World Bank lists that at least five criteria are necessary for successfuldecentralization. These requirements are ensuring that local financial resources match theability to provide local public services, the local community should be aware of the costof services, the community should be able to express their desires in a meaningful way,there should be transparency and accountability of local government activities and thelegal and institutional system should match the political objectives.28 All these criterias have not been implemented as a result of direct local election to decentralization.

The evidence shows that public services are still minumum rate due to the high corruption as actually increased after local election. It seems the corruption only sphered out from central government to local government. Some research and publication showed Indonesia was in a chronic corruption state. Corruption ranked by Transparency International Indonesiain 2009 on Corruption Rating Index (CPI) placed Indonesia at 111 of 180 countries in the world.While for the ASEAN, Indonesia is ranked 5 of 10ASEAN countries, namely Singapore, Brunei Darussalam, Malaysia and Thailandare at 1-4, while Vietnam, the Philippines, Cambodia, Laos and Myanmarwho finished 6-10.

Corruption in local election has a nightmare impact on decentralization. Guidance and guard to track the decentralization and transffered power as well as authority must be redesigned. Direct local election has made political transaction between the head of regions with investors, businessman, bureucracy and any level of government to be involved in corruption by bribing, preveledge trading and monopoly and using bureucracy as campaign supporters.

By looking at a variety of data, a major challenge to the results of recruitment political leadership through Direct Election is to minimize the impactmoney politics that cause negative political reciprocation before electionimmediate progress. Another challenge is the increasing professionalism of the headareas. Formulation of good policy  is largely determined by the understanding of the regional head of the policy formulation process that putscommunity as a major public policy benefit designed. System of direct election still contains the possibility of the election of regional heads less capacity

A recent USAID document on decentralization in Indonesia replicate that local governments have little experience with participatory self-rule and will need assistance to create adequate mechanisms for participation, transparency and accountability. They also have limited technical capacities, particularly to perform functions that have been provided by central agencies, and they will need assistance to demonstrate to citizens that autonomy does lead to improvements in services and the environment. Particular attention will be paid to ensure women’s participation and concerns are included at all levels.

Then what can be done to force elected local head of government only concern to the local public interests as so many political transaction occured during the campaign time. How to make any policies are responsed to the public’ need and avoid the accumulation need of the campaign team and the business cooperation behind the screen? The results thus far correspond to a simple model of political agency. It requires that voters are informed of and care about the program’s impact, and mayors with re-election incentives exert effort on program delivery in order to increase their chances of re-election. A prediction of this model is that first-term mayors are more likely to get re-elected in municipalities where the program performed better. Clearly, re-election responds to the quality of performance in a broader set of public functions which are presumably correlated with effective management.

is largely determined by the understanding of the regional head of the policy formulation process that putscommunity as a major public policy benefit designed. System of direct election still contains the possibility of the election of regional heads less capacity

A recent USAID document on decentralization in Indonesia replicate that local governments have little experience with participatory self-rule and will need assistance to create adequate mechanisms for participation, transparency and accountability. They also have limited technical capacities, particularly to perform functions that have been provided by central agencies, and they will need assistance to demonstrate to citizens that autonomy does lead to improvements in services and the environment. Particular attention will be paid to ensure women’s participation and concerns are included at all levels.

Then what can be done to force elected local head of government only concern to the local public interests as so many political transaction occured during the campaign time. How to make any policies are responsed to the public’ need and avoid the accumulation need of the campaign team and the business cooperation behind the screen? The results thus far correspond to a simple model of political agency. It requires that voters are informed of and care about the program’s impact, and mayors with re-election incentives exert effort on program delivery in order to increase their chances of re-election. A prediction of this model is that first-term mayors are more likely to get re-elected in municipalities where the program performed better. Clearly, re-election responds to the quality of performance in a broader set of public functions which are presumably correlated with effective management.

Indonesia Condition on Decentralization

It is expected that the human development index (HDI) is getting better by implementing decentralization. Since applied in 1999, the regional autonomy has not been able to fulfllled the expectation. Indonesiais stilllagging. HDI is stilllackbehind onpublic services.United Nations DevelopmentProgram (UNDP) stated thatIndonesiaonly0.617of HDI. This figuredropped toposition124 of187 countries, fromlast yearranks108 of169 countries. IPMis a measure ofthe success of developmentof a nationby looking atthreekey indicators, namelyeconomic development, health, and education.

For the level for Human Development Index, Indonesiaranks in the sixthlevel inASEANwith index0.617. This position isunder theSingaporeranked26th(.866); Brunei, sequence-33 (.838), followed byMalaysia, ranked61st(0.761), Thailand, the order of103(.682), and the Philippines, ranking -112(0.644).The position ofIndonesiais onlybetter thanVietnam, whichwasin the order of128 (.583); Laos, position-138 (.524); Cambodia, order-139 (.523), and Myanmar, the rank-149 (.483).One indicator ofdecline in the indexisthe average length ofschoolingof Indonesiais only5.8 years.

Analysing the decresing of HDI after Indonesia applied regional authonomy, then, some questions rised, what is decentralization for if the index of human development even lower and the public services are not achieved by local society. Decentralization has its advantages and disadvantages. Theoverall impact of decentralization on service delivery depends critically on its design andprevailing institutional arrangements.Some literatures determine on factors that are likely to influencewhether decentralization improves the efficiency of resource allocation, promotes costrecovery and accountability, and reduces corruption in public services.

The literaturesuggests that decentralization may work best, indeed may only be meaningful, if there isa local democracy; local democracy may work best in socially and economicallyhomogeneous communities; and the devolution of the power to tax can create verticalexternalities in terms of tax rates that are too high. The most sensible form ofdecentralization may therefore be to create local democratic governments, matchjurisdictional design to communal lines, and to primarily devolve expenditures ratherthan taxes (using transparent and formula-driven fiscal transfers).

As seen in Chart 4, there are 15 local government expenditures on public it is only around 20 percents of the total local budget. Another 80 percents of budgets were primarily used for offices, local employment, and other bureucracies expenses. This imbalance expenditures for public versus local government were the pictures of most local government buggetary. The expectation to have a prosperity by decentralization and direct local election will not be achieved any soon if the figure of local government expenditure ration 80:20 percent which are 80 percent for bureucracy and 20 percent only for public need including to build road, provide health services and educataion.

Chart 4. Local Government Expenditure on Public vs Office

NO	LOCAL GOVERNMENT	% TOTAL LOCAL BUDGET for OFFICE
1	Kabupaten Tulang Bawang Barat	76,08%
2	Kabupaten Klaten	75,13
3	Kabupaten Lampung Tengah	74,57%
4	Kabupaten Pringsemu	73,35%
5	Kabupaten Boyolali	71,66%
6	Kabupaten Purworedjo	71,56%
7	Kabupaten Mojokerto	71,24%
8	Kabupaten Karanganyar	71,17%
9	Kabupaten Tanah Karo	71,04%
10	Kabupaten Kulon Progro	70,93%
11	Kabupaten Pidie	70,85%
12	Kabupaten Magetan	70,83%
13	Kabupaten Bireun	70,62%
14	Kabupaten Banyumas	70,62%
15	Kabupaten Kuningan	70,27%

SUMARY

Some research have been done to evaluate the decentralization impact on the fulfilment of local public needs. There is a finding in the research of Grand Design of Regional Autonomy40 that bureucracy has been damaged as an implication of local direct election. Each employees is expected not to be neutral but to take side on one to another candidates. If, for example, the major and the vice were both running for the next election, then most of bureucrats were forced to support one to another candidate. If then, the candidate supported won, all good position in the office will be easily transferred to the “man of elected government. On the other hand, if PNS has supported a lose candidate, then all the position that they have being involved would be directly take from them. No carrier path for PNS .

Direct election raises many problems. Instead of producing a regional head of qualify and effective work for the people, some elected leaders actually involved in corruption. This condition can not be allowed because it will continue to cause harm (adverse effects) for the community.There are six major performance to measurea program success or failure. they are: 1)local governments should increase their own-source revenues. Dependence on central transfers should decrease and the local proportion of budget financing should increase after dcentralization for sufficiency of local government. 2)government actions are transparent and civil society is permitted to operate freely—devolution should increase the accountability of government officials and discourage most forms of corruption. 3) The advocates of decentralization, moreover, argue that decentralizing the delivery and in some cases the financing of local public goods (i.e., public goods that do not have substantial inter-jurisdictional spillovers) improves the allocation of resources, cost recovery, and accountability, and reduces corruption in service delivery.

Decentralization is thought to bring government closer to the people by way ofintroducing or strengthening the electoral process at subnational levels, the formation ofcouncils and citizens committees, and direct participation of the users of services and

beneficiaries of public goods delivery. Even where not locally elected, sub-nationalgovernment is thought to have greater knowledge of local preferences, so decentralizationmay encourage allocative efficiency. An efficient division of responsibilities amongdifferent levels of government requires, however, that the role of each level ofgovernment must match its capability, and a set of rules defining who has authority andwho will be held accountable. These rules should be explicit and transparent.Fundamental rules are most often spelled out in the constitution, leading to laws andregulations covering specific implementation of the fiscal system and public goodsdelivery.

As has been written by one of Indonesian Regioal Autonomy promotor, Ryaas Rasyid that dealing with issue of provincial and local regulations that are considerd in violation to the law, it should have been avoided if the central government consistenly fulfilled its obligation to provide guidelines, to supervise and control the implementation. Even after the enactment of all those thousand provincial and local regulations, the central government still as an authority to invalidate them. If the central government dose the job excellently, then the implementation of local election and decentralization policy could be succesful in reaching its destination to maximaze public serivices at the provincial and local level. It needs a lot of political will to implement the decentralization and local direct election proportionally .