Tools & Resources

This report provides analysis of the current structures and institutions of election administration in Indonesia and offers recommendations for improving their performance. The report assesses operations of these administrative bodies in light of experience of June 1999 general elections and June 2000 changes to Indonesia’s election law. Comparative information regarding international practices and experiences in election administration is utilized to illustrate important points. However, the report recognizes the need for Indonesian practices to fit Indonesian cultural and political circumstances. Because the report’s focus is on core issues of organizational operations in election administration, many other important and related issues for electoral reform are not addressed. IFES is engaged in providing ongoing technical assistance to Indonesian officials and election experts in other areas, such as political finance regulation and complaint adjudication. Also, this report does not consider in detail several major issues that are still being debated in Indonesia, such as the method of electing the President, or whether to adopt a “single member constituency” rather than a proportional representation electoral system. TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS I SCOPE OF REPORT II EXECUTIVE SUMMARY III INTRODUCTION A Election Circumstances B Election Administration 1. Legislative Framework 2. Administrative Arrangements 3. Operational Performance 4. Enforcement of Electoral Law 5. Reform of Election Administration IV ELECTION ADMINISTRATION IN A DEMOCRACY A Principles B Elements V OVERVIEW OF ELECTION ADMINISTRATION IN INDONESIA A Structure B Composition & Appointment C Duties & Powers D Secretariats 1. National Level 2. Provincial and Lower Levels VI STRUCTURE & OPERATIONS OF NATIONAL ELECTION COMMISSION (KPU) A Management Structures for the 1999 Elections 1. KPU Committees 2. KPU Secretariat B Lessons from the 1999 General Elections 1. Independence & Impartiality 2. Structure 3. Operations C Reorganization & Reform: 1. Recommendations 2. Powers, Responsibilities and Accountability a. Powers b. Role of PPI c. Responsibilities d. Accountability e. Remuneration 3. KPU Secretariat a. Secretary General b. Accountability of the Secretary General c. Relationship Between KPU and Secretary General d. Secretariat Staff Appointments and Conditions of Service 4. Organizational Structure of the KPU Secretariat 5. Priorities a. Timetable VII STRUCTURE & OPERATIONS OF IMPLEMENTING ELECTION COMMITTEES A Lessons from the 1999 General Elections B Reorganization & Reform: Recommendations 1. Structure, Duties & Powers 2. Composition & Appointment a. Party Representation b. Organizational Requirements and Characteristics c. Secretariat 3. Coordination, Communication & Logistics a. Election Materials VIII GENERAL ISSUES OF ELECTION ADMINISTRATION A Election Law 1. Timing of Election Law Review 2. Content of Election Law B Financial Autonomy & Accountability 1. Budgetary Planning 2. Source of KPU Funding 3. Responsibilities for Funding Elections 4. Financial Controls C Transparency and Integrity 1. Independence & Impartiality 2. Conduct of KPU & Election Committee Members & Staff 3. Open Access to KPU & Election Committee Activities & Information 4. Reporting and Accountability 5. External Auditing 6. International Linkages D Internal Management Improvement E Recruitment & Training 1. Recruitment of Secretariat Staff 2. Training and Professional Development 3. Training for External Organizations F Role of Political Parties 1. KPU, PPD-I & PPD-II Levels 2. PPS, PPK & KPPS Levels G Voter Registration H Vote Counting & Consolidation I Complaint Adjudication J Impact of Potential Change K Regional Autonomy IX CONCLUSION X SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS XI APPENDICES Appendix 1 – Summary of Main Features of National Election Management Bodies Appendix 2 – International Institute for Democracy and Electoral Assistance, Code of Conduct for Ethical and Professional Administration of Elections Appendix 3 – Text of Amending Law No 4 of 2000 to Law No 3 Of 1999 on General Elections Appendix 4 – Current Members of the National Election Commission (KPU) Appendix 5 – National Election Commission (KPU) Secretariat Organizational Chart, 1999 Election Appendix 6 – Proposed New Organizational Chart for Secretariat of National Election Commission (KPU) Appendix 7 – Service Conditions of Election Management Body Secretariats

This report summarizes IFES efforts towards building a civil society in Bosnia and Herzegovina in 1999 and 2000.  The report details the projects aims and methods for establishing and supporting civil society in BiH.  The report includes information on pre-election voter education, student involvement, inter-ethnic civic leadership and training.  Also included are brochures, meeting agendas and minutes and various other documents from the project.    

This report analyzes the Election Management Structure in Indonesia.  The report notes that pollworker training, ballot mistakes and lack of information sharing led to a mismanaged election.  The report offers several suggestions for future elections in Indonesia.    

The June 7 parliamentary election in Indonesia represented a decisive step forward in Indonesia’s transition from authoritarian rule to democratic governance. It resulted, for the first time in Indonesia’s history, in a peaceful transfer of power. However, the election did not represent a significant break from the past in terms of election administration. This election process was marked by administrative inefficiency, non-transparency, and a lack of accountability. While certainly a momentous step in Indonesia’s transition, the credibility of the process hinged on election day itself, which was considered successful due to a lack of violence and to the enthusiasm and patience of the voters. These factors alone do not make a successful election, and serious flaws in the process should be addressed before future elections... TABLE OF CONTENTS LIST OF TERMS AND APPREVIATIONS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY I. INTRODUCTION II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUND III. THE ELECTION LAW A. The Proportional System B. Elements of a Majority System C. The Structure of the National Election Commission (KPU) D. Political Parties E. Office of the Secretariat F. Election Campaign G. Political Finance H. Voting, Vote Counting, and Tabulation I. Complaint Adjudication IV. ELECTION ADMINISTRATION A. General Principles of Election Administration B. Operational Standards for Election Administration C. Structure of the National Election Commission (KPU) D. Structure of the Election Administration (Management) E. Technology Support F. Planning G. Regulations, Procedures, and Mechanics H. Materials I. Systems and Methods V. RECOMMENDATIONS A. The Legal Framework—The Law on General Elections B. The Election Administration VI. CONCLUSIONS VII. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A: “Money Politics”: Regulation of Political Finance in Indonesia Attachment B: Election Material Distribution Attachment C: Projected and Actual Numbers of Polling Stations Attachment D: List of Forms Used for the 1999 General Election Attachment E: Forms Used for Polling and Counting (Forms C, C1, C3, C4, C5) Attachment F: Polling Station Counting Sheet (Form C2) Attachment G: Statements Related to the Consolidation of Results (Forms D, D1, D2, D3) Attachment H: Forms for Consolidation of Results for DPR, DPRD I, and DPRD II (Forms D41, D42, D43) Attachment I: Law Number 3 of 1999 on General Elections Attachment J: Law Number 2 of 1999 on Political Parties Attachment K: Structure of the Indonesian Election Administration Attachment L: Allocation of DPR Seats to Political Parties Attachment M: 1999 Ballot Sample

On June 7, 1999 Indonesia held parliamentary elections.  This report summarizes IFES observations from those elections and provides recommendations for better administration in future elections.

This evaluation of the IFES pollworker training assistance program was conducted in Indonesia in 1999.  The report concludes that pollworker training was inadequate and suggests direction for future training sessions in Indonesia.

The June 7, 1999 parliamentary elections in the Republic of Indonesia were a transitional step toward democratic rule and professional, independent election administration. Although, for the most part, election day was a peaceful expression of the franchise, the election was seriously flawed administratively. One of the most glaring and potentially disastrous elements in the election administration was the training of the election day poll workers or KPPS members. Through the ingenuity of some, past experience of others, and willingness to work extremely hard, the Indonesian KPPS members performed admirably on June 7. But adequate and timely training, clear instructions, and uniform and professional administration would have improved their performance. The evaluation of the poll worker training program can be seen to clearly support the fact that the training was inconsistent at best, and/or non-existent throughout the country. In discussion after discussion, KPPS members support these findings and provide their own recommendations for improved election procedures and training. This inconsistency permeates the entire administration from the manner and timing of the appointment of KPPS members, to the number of KPPS members in a polling station, or TPS, to the delivery of materials and instructions to KPPS members. Regulations meant to standardize procedures either did not exist, were unknown, or were ignored by the various levels of election administration. It is essential that the National Election Commission (KPU) thoroughly review and prepare professional administrative remedies to correct these deficiencies before the next election. Only with uniform regulations and a consistent training program, which is professionally prepared and administered, can election administration problems be avoided in future elections.