AMPLOP DEMOKRASI (full movie)

In the hands of Wahyudi Anggoro Hadi, waste has become something of value.

Waste has also become a source of hope for thousands of residents in Panggungharjo Village, Bantul Regency, Yogyakarta.

Wahyudi’s initiative led Panggungharjo Village to win the title of Best National Village in 2014:

In addition, Wahyudi received the ASEAN Leadership Award in 2019,

recognized for his role in rural development and poverty alleviation through waste management.

Two years later, Wahyudi also brought this village the title of Anti-Corruption Village from the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) in 2021:

These achievements gave Wahyudi the confidence to run in the 2024 regional elections.

Wahyudi was one of 1,500 pairs of candidates for regent and deputy regent, mayor and deputy mayor, and governor and deputy governor in Indonesia’s simultaneous 2024 local elections.

They competed in 37 provinces, 415 regencies, and 93 cities across the country.

At that time, Wahyudi Anggoro Hadi ran as a candidate for deputy regent, alongside Untoro Hariadi who ran as regent of Bantul.

They competed against two other pairs of candidates: Abdul Halim Muslih with Aris Suharyanta, and Joko Purnomo with Roni Wijaya Indra Gunawan.

Wahyudi entered the race with the capital of his experience leading Panggungharjo Village for more than 10 years.

The series of awards and recognitions he had received became social capital to attract votes.

Wahyudi and his partner were committed to fighting against money politics.

Both of them hoped to change the dynamics of local elections into something healthier.

So yesterday we tried to carry out an experiment, creating a new arena.

That means a political contest without money.

Our hope was to bring people into this arena,

In fact, we have been trying to push for a money-free political process since the village head election back in 2012:

In reality, the principle of running without money politics did not go smoothly.

The cost of contesting in politics required much more than just campaign materials.

Wahyudi also had to spend money on political parties to obtain the ticket to compete.

Imagine, out of around 5 billion rupiah, perhaps 70 percent was spent on consolidating political parties.

The rest was for operations, campaign props, and so on.

But 70 percent of the cost had to be spent on political party consolidation

so that the political machine would work. Even though in the end, it didn’t work.

This included the cost of securing the ticket to become a candidate for deputy regent in the 2024 elections.

When they registered, the Untoro–Wahyudi pair gained support from two political parties.

We spent nearly 1.2 to 1.3 billion rupiah for those two political parties.

The officially reported political expenses of Wahyudi’s pair were still smaller than those of their two rivals.

However, that number was only around 10 percent of the estimated total cost Wahyudi spent throughout the 2024 election.

So, in total, to participate in the contest in Bantul, which has around 720,000 registered voters,

the political cost we spent was relatively cheap—around 4.5 to 5 billion rupiah.

And that was the lowest among other contestants.

The high political costs have become a nightmare for those who want to run in elections in Indonesia, including local elections.

The phenomenon of political costs also became the focus of Mada Sukmajati,

who was conducting research on election spending in the 2024 regional elections.

I’ll begin with several findings from our collaborative research project involving UGM, KITLV Leiden, and Ahmad Habad University in India.

In this research, alongside the 2024 legislative elections, we also studied the 2024 local elections.

We used three focal points to explore the campaign finance profiles of candidates:

first, their sources of income; second, their expenditures; and third, their financial management.

The research was conducted using a shadowing model, covering 14 cities and regencies in the sampling areas.

Each researcher followed a candidate pair directly to obtain firsthand information.

The components of political costs in this research were analyzed using eight approaches.

The first finding showed that political costs in the 2024:

Local elections ranged between 7 billion and 100 billion rupiah for candidates running at the regent or mayoral level.

This included the estimated percentages of expenditure components.

Including the posture of the estimated percentage of the output from the total political fund.

From this component, it is estimated the cost required by each candidate touches the number of tens of billions to trillions of rupiah.

The research also found that the practice of vote buying contributed significantly to the high political costs.

On average, candidates’ budgets for vote buying ranged from 300 million to 14 billion rupiah. This accounted for 26 to 76 percent of the total campaign budget.

These costs were allocated to buy votes in the community.

The amounts varied—some were 50,000 rupiah, some 400,000 rupiah. That was the range across the 14 regencies and cities in our study.

After vote buying, the second largest expenditure was on staple food packages and other forms of gifts.

These were known as ‘club goods’—group items like prayer equipment for religious groups, sports equipment for youth organizations, and so on.

This was the second-largest allocation in candidates’ spending profiles for the 2024 elections.

In addition, political dowries were also suspected of boosting election costs.

The dowries ranged from 500 million to 7.5 billion rupiah just to secure a nomination ticket.

These dowries were sometimes given institutionally to political parties, meaning the party managed them—sometimes transparently.

But others were handed directly to individual party elites, which were much more closed and non-transparent in their management.

When we talk about money politics, it can occur in three arenas.

First is candidacy buying, or the sale and purchase of tickets.

A study by the KPK confirmed that the majority of losing candidates admitted to giving money

to political parties that was not recorded in party financial reports, party contributions, or campaign finance reports.

So, candidacy buying—paying just to get into the race—was already required.

This phenomenon was also felt by Iqbal Hambali, a resident of Banjarbaru City, South Kalimantan.

Iqbal witnessed various forms of money politics in his area during the elections.

But what I did find was a friend in one district of South Kalimantan

who was able to buy a brand-new NMAX motorbike in cash from the money he got through political handouts.

The distribution models varied. They ranged from canvassing door-to-door to sticking campaign stickers as a sign of support for a candidate.

As for distribution, sometimes it was like this

on a house’s door or window, there would be a candidate’s sticker. Underneath the sticker, money was placed.

Then every two or three days, someone would come by, peel off or cover the sticker, and leave more money underneath.

Take, for example, Agus, a village head on the island of Java who once got involved in distributing money politics.

He worked for the incumbent pair.

Agus’s involvement was based on direct instructions from higher bureaucratic levels.

In our area, money circulated through the village head.

The village heads were gathered by campaign teams and candidates,

given operational money and sheets to fill with lists of guaranteed voters. These lists were then exchanged for cash.

The calculation was about 30,000 to 50,000 rupiah per voter.

The operational budget was based on the number of voters in each village.

And if targets set by the campaign team or command post were met,

say, 70 or 80 percent, there would be rewards in additional cash.

The village heads didn’t act alone. They also had to build shadow teams to distribute the money.

The distribution worked like this: after village heads submitted voter data,

they would later be invited on a set date to collect envelopes of cash to distribute according to the lists.

Before distributing the forms, the village head was asked to create a team for each polling station.

The polling station teams’ task was to list voters one by one, then return the data to the village head, who then handed it to the campaign post.

Usually those involved were influential local figures—RT and RW heads, or respected elders in the community.

Agus was forced to carry out this distribution of money politics. If not, threats were already waiting.

The threat was that the regency’s financial aid for village development would be cut.

The policy depended on how many votes could be secured in the village.

This had happened in previous elections, but it was even more massive in 2024: The bureaucracy became a political machine, especially for incumbents.

The village administration, down to the neighborhood level, became part of the money distribution network.

In our opinion, the situation is far more complex in the 2024 election than before.

This was one of the consequences.

A number of politicians who wanted to compete had to do whatever it took.

Often, this path led them behind prison bars.

However, they who made the regulations were trying to legalize this corruptive practice.

The language of the quality of voters is first like this. Don't we think that political money is legalized In the PKPU with certain limitations.

Because money politics is a belief. There is no choice in society.

The atmosphere is different. So if the PKPU, the term money politics and cost politics, try to be stricter.

And the language, just legalize it, what is the limit? So that the bottom also knows that if it is money politics, the limit must be narrowed.

Because if this thing is not legalized, we will continue to tease.

The winner in the future will be the oligarchs There is no longer competition for politicians and citizens, but it's a competition between the oligarchs.

Because they don't have money, they won't win. The people won't choose because this is the atmosphere, the condition of the people's ecosystem.

So we should just legalize it with a certain limit. Even though a number of other parties are still trying to fund their own political funds.

Although some candidates still tried to fund their campaigns independently.

Wahyudi is one of them.

Because we actually didn’t have strong economic capacity.

So it was almost magical—how we had no money but could still spend money. It was strange.

But of course, some certificates are still being held as collateral, some things won’t be recovered, and for operational costs, maybe it will take five years without returns.

But we already calculated those consequences.

The high political costs opened doors for other parties to step in and fund candidates.

This included funding from local and national businessmen.

In terms of financing, our findings also showed that in resource-rich areas—like mining region,

often the candidates themselves or their families were involved in mining businesses, or they were supported by mining entrepreneurs.

One of the provinces most vulnerable to business and oligarchic interests in the 2024 regional elections was South Kalimantan.

South Kalimantan spans more than 3.7 million hectares,

but over half of its land area has already been granted under various concession permits.

This potential became a key bargaining chip for candidates during the campaign.

But that happens in the context of an area with a rich natural resource.

The funding is also very large, the allocation for monetary policy is also very large,

the nominal for monetary policy that is accepted by the voters is also much larger compared to areas that do not have resources.

However, the South Kalimantan branch of the Indonesian Forum for the Environment (WALHI) believed

that local election candidates were actually opening the way for investors through their campaign promises.

In terms of campaign promises, very little was said about protecting the environment.

Environmental concerns were barely raised.

Instead, those elected argued it was all for the people’s welfare,

facilitating investors to come in, supposedly to improve welfare.

But we have to ask: which people’s welfare? Communities in remote areas don’t even buy water, their food comes from the forest, their needs are met.

They are more prosperous than us in the cities.

At least three million registered voters were on the permanent voter list (DPT) for the 2024 regional elections in South Kalimantan,

spread across two cities and eleven regencies.

They would choose from at least 31 candidate pairs running for governor, regent, and mayor positions.

When I look at the electoral contest in South Kalimantan, it’s quite disheartening.

Out of thirteen districts and cities, many candidates came from natural resource powerholders,

and their campaigns were heavily backed by resource-based interests.

Here, the intersection of business and political interests in the 2024 local elections was clear.

The high political costs met the need to protect capital owners’ economic bases.

The sad part is that during campaigns, candidates ask for the people’s support, but once elected, will the people still be heard? That’s the big question.

Will policies be more pro-people, or more pro-oligarch? That’s our concern.

In the past, candidates usually sought approval from religious or community leaders.

But unfortunately, in Banjarbaru, approval was sought from one oligarch we all know well.

Initially, the Banjarbaru mayoral election was contested by two pairs,

Erna Lisa Halaby with Wartono and Aditya Mufti with Said Abdullah.

Later, the Banjarbaru Election Commission (KPU) disqualified Aditya and Said.

The KPU argued they had committed violations,

misusing authority, programs, and activities in ways that disadvantaged other candidates.

This decision left Lisa and Wartono as the sole candidates in Banjarbaru’s 2024 mayoral election.

Instead of providing a new ballot with a blank box option, the Banjarbaru KPU decided to use the old ballot that still listed both pairs, citing lack of time.

However, any votes cast for Aditya and Said would be declared invalid.

In particular, in KALSEL, this time the leadership is the most brutal.

Why is that? Because there is a team that is structured, systematic, and massive, and the position is elevated.

I’ve participated in many elections, but this is the first time I’ve seen this,

If we didn’t follow KPU’s instructions, our votes were invalid, even though only one pair remained valid on the ballot.

Whereas, only one voice letter was true. Even if there is a candidate, it must be provided with an empty seat.

However, in Banjarbaru, there is none, due to the lack of time, even though it was not carried out.

The existence of this obstacle refers to the meeting of Lisa and Syamsuddin Andi Arsyad, or Haji Issam.

Haji Isam is a South Kalimantan businessman and head of Jhonlin Group.

His name had once appeared as part of Joko Widodo and Ma’ruf Amin’s 2019 presidential campaign team.

More recently, under Prabowo’s presidency, he was tasked with managing the Food Estate program.

Mr. Andi Syamsuddin Arsyad is a prominent entrepreneur from Kalimantan.

Yes, we believe the Banjarbaru election was engineered from the start.

It was designed so that only one candidate would remain, no election observers were allowed,

and SK 174 was issued at the very last minute so it was impossible to annul.

Even if annulment was possible, the process would be too complicated.

People would think it wasn’t worth the trouble. But for us, it wasn’t right. Deep down, we felt it had to be resisted.

This situation had triggered public outrage, including Iqbal and a number of his friends.

Show us, the head of the KPU of Banjarbaru, we have something to ask, there is something we want to convey.

And we today, during the action, there is no interest in voting for you. Thank you.

They also voiced their concern through action, despite the end of the intimidation experienced by Iqbal.

On December 1, 2024, at exactly 9 o'clock at night,

I received a package that could be said to be unpleasant,

which contained a letter and bread, bread as an amulet at the time of delivery.

And in the letter, it was stated, if you still want to live and still want to have a career,

then you better for you to be silent or be silent forever.

The same concern over oligarchic influence in South Kalimantan’s elections was raised by Noor Halis Majid.

The former head of the Banjarmasin Election Commission saw how oligarchs played a vital role in local geopolitics.

The oligarchic groups want to win elections in strategic areas, especially resource-rich regions.

And Banjarbaru, now the provincial capital and gateway, is highly strategic.

Winning Banjarbaru means winning South Kalimantan.

That’s why oligarchic groups intervene in ways that are improper.

Noor Halis also emphasized that election officials’ integrity was crucial in this context.

But oligarchs had many ways to consolidate control over election administrators to ensure their candidates won.

They offer bribes, of course. But also positions. Election officials have career tracks,

district officials can move to the provincial level, then to the national level.

Offering future positions is a powerful incentive.

Or they might be allowed multiple terms. These are bargaining chips beyond just money.

In many forums, we hear: winning at the polling station doesn’t guarantee victory in the official decision.

Winning at the ballot box doesn’t guarantee winning the KPU ruling.

These stigmatizations made many candidates believe…

…that if they don’t align with the election commission, they won’t win.

But that’s a false paradigm.

They should keep their distance and protect election officials from this transactional politics.

One, valid!

Two.

Three.

Ballot number one.

Ballot number two.

Still on the ballot number one.

Number two.

Number two.

The 2024 simultaneous regional elections took place…

…amid various violations, including allegations of money politics.

I saw you mark that (blank ballot)!

This hasn’t been marked yet, right?

It has! Take it!

Show it!

Where’s the one you marked? Take it out!

Show me the ballot you marked!

This one was blank before

It must be acknowledged, vote buying occurs not only because voters are willing…

…but also due to social pressures. For example, power relations.

When people are intimidated, restricted from social services…

…or threatened with losing access to aid if they refuse.

In those situations, voters become objects with no choice.

But inside the voting booth, if secrecy is guaranteed…

… nobody can know whom a voter chooses…

… and their secrecy is fully protected when they vote.

That’s what provides safety.

Even if they were targeted by money politics, in the booth they remain free as voters.

In the end, the Constitutional Court ordered re-voting in certain regions

especially where candidates were proven to have engaged in money politics.

Our law enforcement’s view of vote buying is still very narrow.

They only see small cases involving tens or hundreds of thousands of rupiah.

They don’t see the bigger picture that this is an attack on democracy

an electoral crime that damages the credibility of our elections and the quality of competition.

In my view, we need to improve our system.

But amid concerns about the quality of our voters and our democracy, this is the state’s response.

And we shouldn’t be ashamed to admit that this system is extremely expensive.

(Crowd) Agree.

Right?

(Crowd) Agree!

When I look at the winners…

… I see exhaustion on their faces.

Even the winners look drained, let alone the losers.

Meanwhile, our neighboring countries seem far more efficient.

Malaysia.

Singapore.

India.

They elect their members of parliament once, and that’s it.

The parliament then elects the governor, elects the regent.

There was growing talk of changing regional elections from direct voting back to appointments by regional parliaments (DPRD).

The high cost of politics was one of the reasons cited.

But is that a valid reason to change the system?

We have held both types of elections.

Before direct elections in 2004, regional heads were chosen by DPRD.

And we saw the results.

Political corruption was still rampant,

political representation was poor, and policies were not participatory.

So I don’t see a strong argument…

…for shifting from direct to DPRD elections just because of money politics.

Because money politics will still exist in DPRD.

Let’s compare, during the New Order and early Reformasi

some leaders were even directly appointed by Jakarta.

That led to unrest, demands for independence, and resistance to central power.

But when local governments were given not only economic and administrative decentralization but also political power…

… they built their own political deliberation.

If that is revoked, there will surely be protests and dissatisfaction, and attention will turn back to Jakarta.

Is Jakarta ready for that?

Moreover, as long as corrupt practices are committed by political elites…

… moving the elections to DPRD won’t solve anything.

In the end, political costs wrapped in the so-called “envelope of democracy”...

… are nothing but an illusion for the quality of this nation’s civilization.

Improving the quality of elections is the key and it must start today.

It all depends on political parties.

Everything starts with them.

If they don’t care about money politics, the situation will stay as it is

like a snowball rolling downhill.

Political parties must reform themselves internally.

It sounds simple, but in today’s context it’s extremely ambitious and very difficult.

I think we must use multiple solutions, because contexts differ.

For example, Jakarta is like a political laboratory in terms of voter maturity.

In Jakarta’s elections, big coalitions rarely win.

Because people are well-informed, tech-savvy, and critical.

They punish political groups that are undemocratic or manipulate the process.

In the name of Allah, I solemnly swear…

… that I will faithfully carry out my duties…

…as Governor

Deputy Governor

Regent

Deputy Regent

Mayor

Deputy Mayor

to the best of my ability and with the utmost fairness.

The big challenge is how to create an election commission that is truly free from those interests.

Number one, valid!

Next, ballot number one. Valid!

My personal hope is that democracy runs as it should.

A healthy process with no money politics.

People should vote with conscience.

There should be no more threats, intimidation, or terror.

Healthy elections must be about competing ideologies and ideas…

… not about who has the most money or backing.

It should be a contest of ideas.