2019 Election Is Seen to Fulfill the Sense of Justice
itoday - KUBU incumbent Joko Widodo insisted on continuing the government into two periods even though there was a strengthening of the movement that wanted a change. Joko Widodo assumed that he understood very well what the purpose of the change movement was, namely his government was suppressed only valid for one period.
The challenger side of Prabowo Subianto insisted on filling the flow of aspirations for change, but that did not mean that the emphasis was on Prabowo Subianto's side, but from the people's aspirations.
Competition between the two camps is determined by the large number of votes. The problem lies in the decline of the basic principles of the principles of freedom, direct, honest and fair in the process of achieving a number of votes.
How broadcast information about the failure to fulfill the principle of freedom. For example, some of the Ministers, Governors, Regents, Mayors, sub-district heads, village heads, PPK, KPPS, police officers, KPU members, Bawaslu personnel, and State Civil Apparatus were caught on camera and broadcast on youtube violated the principle of freedom from the basic principles of elections but without getting an honest and free trial impartially between the two competing camps.
Furthermore, some of the election officers caught on video cameras have cheated in the form of voting themselves. The activity of theft of ballot boxes, replacing the contents of voices, and incidents of burning letters is a form of failure of the principle directly based on the election. Inflating, replacing the number of votes, and errors in inputting data has reinforced the failure of the honesty principle.
Then the weakness and slowness, and the uncertainty of the electoral institutions in upholding the basic principles of the electoral principles made the quality of the election still perceived as not fulfilling a sense of justice. The result is increased tension in managing conflict management. Increasing the quality of conflict is at the threshold of tolerance for social legitimacy.
The efforts of interfaith leaders and community leaders to build reconciliation and advocate for a solution to distrust of the fulfillment of the basic principles of electoral principles by using the constitutional path have not shown any light. Dipper seemed not to be welcomed. That was because the challenger camp felt how in the 2014 election dispute resolution process using legal channels against the aspirations to enforce electoral fraud felt more beneficial to the incumbent.
The track record of the incumbent's performance during the reign actually increases failure to fulfill the principle of transparency. The huge and unpaid expectation of the incumbent's performance seemed to have convinced that the quality of the 2019 vote counting performance was perceived to be worse than 2014. Enforcement of one-sided criminal justice law in the challenger's camp had made militancy to strengthen the flow of those who wanted change.
So, the tipping point of improving the quality of election sound depends on the quality of enforcement of good governance to re-fulfill the application and acceptance of the principles and principles of elections as a whole.