Synchronizing Central and Regional Governments Following the 2024 Simultaneous Regional Elections: Challenges Regarding Representation and Regional Government Effectiveness in 2025
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.30656/pn6prx41Keywords:
electoral integrity, state resources, level playing field, bureaucratic neutrality, electoral inequalityAbstract
Problem: Electoral integrity is determined not only by the voting and vote-counting processes but also by the fairness of the electoral playing field. Elections in Indonesia continue to face challenges related to unequal access to state resources, including public officials, government programs, public facilities, institutional communication, and administrative authority, which may generate electoral advantages for particular contestants.
Purpose: This study aims to analyze the forms of inequality in the use of state resources in Indonesian elections and to examine their implications for the level playing field and electoral integrity.
Methodology: This study employs a qualitative approach using document analysis. Data were drawn from official reports on the 2024 elections, publications of the General Elections Commission and the Election Supervisory Body, Constitutional Court decisions concerning disputes over the 2024 presidential election results, and scholarly literature on electoral integrity, abuse of state resources, level playing field, bureaucratic neutrality, and incumbency advantage. The analysis was conducted by mapping the forms of state-resource use, assessing the electoral advantages they may generate, and examining their impact on competitive equality.
Results/Findings: The study finds that the use of state resources may create state-resource electoral asymmetry, referring to structural inequality arising from unequal access to state capacity among electoral contestants. Such inequality may generate institutional resource advantage, weaken the level playing field, and undermine electoral integrity. However, not every use of government resources constitutes electoral misconduct, as governmental functions must continue during election periods. The central problem lies in the blurred boundary between governing and campaigning. This study proposes an electoral integrity–level playing field nexus and highlights the need to strengthen institutional neutrality, ensure transparency in the use of public resources, and establish clearer institutional boundaries between governmental functions and electoral interests.
Keywords: electoral integrity; state resources; level playing field; bureaucratic neutrality; electoral inequality
Downloads
References
Agranoff, R. (2001). Managing within the matrix: Do collaborative intergovernmental relations exist? Publius: The Journal of Federalism, 31(2), 31–56. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.pubjof.a004895
Agranoff, R., & McGuire, M. (2001). Big questions in public network management research. Journal of Public Administration Research and Theory, 11(3), 295–326. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordjournals.jpart.a003504
Amri, A. M. (2024). Menyongsong Pilkada Serentak Tahun 2024: Tantangan dan prospek demokrasi lokal di Indonesia. Jurnal Keadilan Pemilu, 5(1), 74–84. https://doi.org/10.55108/jkp.v5i1.437
Astriana, S., & Khoirunurrofik. (2024). Fiscal decentralization and governance performance: Empirical evidence from the district city level in Indonesia. Jurnal Ekonomi dan Kebijakan Pembangunan, 13(1), 15–29. https://doi.org/10.29244/jekp.13.1.2024.15-29
Fatimah, M., Haryanto, & Retnandari, N. D. (2024). Central-local government relations in regional planning and budgeting in Indonesia: Between autonomy and control. Policy & Governance Review, 8(2), 131–153. https://doi.org/10.30589/pgr.v8i2.922
Hooghe, L., & Marks, G. (2003). Unraveling the central state, but how? Types of multi-level governance. American Political Science Review, 97(2), 233–243. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000649
Mansbridge, J. (2003). Rethinking representation. American Political Science Review, 97(4), 515–528. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0003055403000856
Pitkin, H. F. (1967). The concept of representation. University of California Press.
Smith, B. C. (1985). Decentralization: The territorial dimension of the state. George Allen & Unwin.
Sujarwoto. (2012). Political decentralization and local public services performance in Indonesia. Journal of Public Administration and Governance, 2(3), 55–84. https://doi.org/10.5296/jpag.v2i3.2156
Dokumen dan Sumber Resmi
Komisi Pemilihan Umum Republik Indonesia. (2024). Peraturan Komisi Pemilihan Umum Nomor 2 Tahun 2024 tentang Tahapan dan Jadwal Pemilihan Gubernur dan Wakil Gubernur, Bupati dan Wakil Bupati, serta Walikota dan Wakil Walikota Tahun 2024.
Kementerian Dalam Negeri Republik Indonesia, & Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional/Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional. (2024). Surat Edaran Bersama tentang penyelarasan Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Panjang Daerah dengan Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Panjang Nasional Tahun 2025–2045.
Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional/Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional. (2023, May 30). Bappenas pastikan konvergensi pusat dan daerah dalam RPJPN 2025–2045.
Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional/Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional. (2024a, March 7). RKP Tahun 2025 sebagai fondasi akselerasi pertumbuhan ekonomi inklusif dan berkelanjutan.
Kementerian Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional/Badan Perencanaan Pembangunan Nasional. (2024b, May 6). Musrenbangnas 2024: Bappenas pastikan sinkronisasi pembangunan dengan program Presiden terpilih.
Republik Indonesia. (2024). Undang-Undang Nomor 59 Tahun 2024 tentang Rencana Pembangunan Jangka Panjang Nasional Tahun 2025–2045. Lembaran Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 2024 Nomor 194.
.
![](https://i.ibb.co.com/b86yVJX/image-journal-template1.webp")
.png)
.png)
.png)
