In no longer time, Indonesia will hold the simultaneouslylocal elections democratic party in February 2017. This time there were 101 heads of regions to be selected, consisting of heads of regions in 7 provinces, 76 districts and 18 cities.
Concurrent local elections in 2017 needs to be examined and prepared well, especially at the provincial level in Aceh, Bangka Belitung, Jakarta, Banten, Gorontalo, West Sulawesi and Papua. The vulnerability of the elections at the provincial level was higher than the district or city given area distribution and broader and more diverse participants.
As in the 2015 election,2017 election is expected to be dynamic and challenging. Although labeled democratic party, which befits a party filled with excitement, could be transformed into a democratic party of euphoria and turmoil because of excessive emotion and sentiment. Disappointment over a celebration of democracy to those who did not win is a reasonable and should be prepared by all the candidates, but the disappointment of excessive should be wary because it can take advantage of the masses and lead to horizontal conflict.
Discontent over the elections results, if it is felt that there was fraud, should be prosecuted through the mechanism of positive law, not the law of the jungle to perform an action. Reflecting on the elections in 2015, followed by the 268 area, there were 150 lawsuits filed by parties who are not satisfied with the Constitutional Court. Of the 150 lawsuits there are five lawsuits were taken up by the Constitutional Court.
Electoral conflicts occurred in Indonesia for several times, such as occurred in the district of Tuban, East Java (2006), which resulted in several buildings were damaged. In Tana Toraja, South Sulawesi (2010) electoral conflicts resulting in casualties 1 killed, 10 people were seriously injured and property damage.
Mojokerto regency of East Java (2010) electoral conflicts caused 22 cars were destroyed. Notes on electoral conflicts in the reform era can be written even longer, but the most important is to know that the greatest electoral conflicts caused by the unpreparedness of the participants of the elections to lose.
To deal with the elections in 2017 which dynamic and challenging, it is necessary to do threat analysis, vulnerability analysis and risk analysis as the basis for determining measures of prevention, response and recovery. This move was made to deal with situations that could potentially be a threat to security and order.
Threats
The biggest threat of Jakarta elections in 2017 is the reaction of the parties are not ready to lose. The reaction is carried out by the parties would not accept the election results vary. For those who are aware of law would do a lawsuit against the election results through legal channels in the Constitutional Court. But for those who do not (want to) litigious, will usually use destructive manner by committing acts of terror even frightening and harmful to impose his will.
The possibility of the parties which does not accept the election results could have used a variety of ways, at the top level using legal means positive, but at a lower level living the law of the jungle. If any legal action for acts that violate the law by this party will relinquish responsibility to the perpetrators of the lower level, it will even leveraged the grass root level to mempekeruh atmosphere. Destructive actions more massive if there is a catalyst for sensitive issues such as racial issues.
Parties are predicted to perform a destructive action because it would not accepted the election results usually are most likely to spend a lot of capital, or has already sacrifice something that can not be back again. This happens, for example against a candidate who has lost a career or previous status as a condition that must be removed following the election.
Potential destructive action that occurs by the top candidates is very large, especially if the candidate has ardent supporters and in large numbers. These methods will be used to influence or exert pressure on the decision makers to willingly obey. Model mobilizes the masses and to exert pressure through violence can be controlled so that it becomes a horizontal conflict. Participants who lost the election, refused to accept the election results, would not take legal action, likely to use a destructive way as the overflow disappointment.
Another potential threat in the Jakarta's elections in 2017 is the political money. Although there is a tendency that the voters in Jakarta, including voters with a high degree of rational and not easily tempted by money, but the use of political money is likely to remain there for the taking portions of which remain uncertain voters with voter choice or opportunists. Political money can be made directly with the dawn attack, or by other means such as promises of distribution of money. These methods of course injure democracy and are a potential conflict.
From that analysis, it can be seen that the level of threat in the Jakarta's elections in 2017 is high. This is in addition based on the potential that can happen, also based on events that have occurred in Jakarta, especially concerning SARA.
Insecurity
Blackspots in the Jakarta's election in 2017 if not addressed and managed to be exploited by certain parties as its entrance threat. In general can be a vulnerable point in the election campaign as a violation, the final voters list (DPT) is problematic, counting the election results fraudulent ballots are damaged or not standard, and other things that disrupt the electoral process.
Blackspots will be used as an excuse and triger for those who are not satisfied to carry out actions against the election result.
In addition to technical problems organizing campaigns and elections, the critical points of the Jakarta's elections in 2017 contained in administrative matters relating to the status and eligibility of candidates who follow the regional head elections.
Candidates head affected area or are undergoing legal process is very prone to be such a problem demands or agitation of materials that could lead to conflict between supporters.
Voters' data is very vulnerable to become a source of interference in the Jakarta's election 2017. Suspected double voters or citizens who are not registered will be a source of problems. Source of data voters from e-ID still need to be reviewed again its validity considering e-ID itself is still unfinished 100%.
Logistics election alsoshould be noted carefully so as not to become an obstacle in the implementation of Jakarta's election in 2017. It should remember the national capital and there are no obstacles in Jakarta for geographical and transportation problems, if there are problems on the logistics of the elections would be very embarrassing.
Overcrowding in the Jakarta's election in 2017 will create a security gap, which can be exploited by certain parties who want to create a not conducive situation. Those who may take advantage of this situation are the radical groups, who would use terrorist means to impose interest and show their existence.
Those vulnerabilities should not have happened in the Jakarta's elections in 2017. However, given the political interest is very high, it is possible the parties create the vulnerability to be exploited as the entrance to the threat of disruption to the Jakarta's elections in 2017.
From the description, the author considers that the level of insecurity in the Jakarta’s election in 2017 is still at the middle level (medium). So that needs hard work from Jakarta's General Election Commissions, Jakarta's Supervisory Board of Elections, security forces and the community as participants Jakarta’s election to both maintain that the vulnerability does not become a trigger of the disorder Jakarta's election in 2017.
The Risk
The risk is calculated from the chance of adverse events and the impact of the incident. Adverse events such as horizontal conflict occurred several times after the counting of votes is done by the parties do not accept the results. In the elections there must be winners and there are losers. For that need to be taken into account the risk of adverse events in the Jakarta's election in 2017 because the losing side does not accept the Jakarta's election results in 2017.
Seeing the political tension is high enough for this, especially during the election campaign in 2017, then the chances of adverse events such as horizontal conflicts might happen. Electoral conflicts, especially if it has been embellished by elements of SARA will potentially be a horizontal conflict widens and out of the context of the elections. Seeing frequency noise that occurs during the Jakarta's election campaign in 2017 it can be assessed that the chances of occurrence of adverse events in the 2017 elections, especially the horizontal conflict is at the medium level.
The impact in the event of conflict on the elections, the city is estimated at the level of medium-heavy. It is based on the assessment that there has been a polarization of the current groups and classes in society. Polarization is forming camps will face each other. Advantages of the Jakarta's election was followed by three (3) pairs of candidates so that the polarization is not too extreme occurred despite the fact that elections in Jakarta looked dominant faction fight between the incumbent and not the incumbent.
With the level of the opportunities that are and the estimated impact on the level of moderate to severe, then the risk of Jakarta's election in 2017 is rated at a high level (can be seen on the risk matrix). To prevent adverse events in the local elections in 2017 necessary steps as a residual, so that high risk can be prevented, or treated properly if it occurs, and can be recovered to return to the normal situation.
Prevention
Risk can be managed by the strategic steps that consists of 4 stages (Prunckun: 2015), namely prevention, preparedness, emergency response or response and recovery or PPRR (Prevention, Preparation, Response, Recovery). Prevention can be done by eliminating the threat components that did not happen. Threat components consist of goodwill, encouragement, knowledge and resources (Prunckun: 2015).
Intention and encouragement are needed so that threat does not occur and can be controlled if in the electoral process, the parties that are not satisfied with the outcome of the elections would be gentle and accept whatever result as a consequence of a fight. If not encouragement from the losers, then there should be no parties are doing a disservice.
Intention to do a disservice must be eliminated with the realization that there is a greater importance of the elections results, namely the unity of the nation. Candidate of Regional Head Election participants should be ready with the results of the election, or if it is not satisfied with the election results they should use constitutional means through the Constitutional Court and not by encouraging their supporters to act with others.
Conflict prevention can also be carried out by the security forces and intelligence mainly by showing the presence and assertive stance and neutral so that the parties that could potentially be a source of threat should rethink carry out the action.
Preparations that need to be done to deal with threats after prevention can not be done or assume that the threat will occur is by dialogue and approaches to elements of society. Approach to political leaders, religious leaders, community leaders, and other components that need to be done in order to create a strong communication and networking. This is necessary if the threat to the elections in 2017 the case then do the handling persuasively by many parties, while avoiding polarization, between groups of people, or between a source of conflict with law enforcement officials.
The security forces and law enforcement in this case IS the Police. They certainly not in doubt. Police confirmed with the device already preparing troops to confront the Democratic Party in Jakarta. But the role of the police certainly will not be maximized if it is not supported by the community as participants in the elections. For the community and the police need to work together, especially in the early prevention and early detection of threats.
If the threat to the elections as horizontal conflicts occur, then steps must be carried out as a response needs to consider the impact that will occur. Steps need to done as persuasive and dialogue. But if the threat occurs is harmful then of course the police authority to conduct measurable action and appropriate procedures to prevent such occurrences spread or cause more losses.
When a threat occurs and handling have been done then the important thing to do is to recover the situation. It is even necessary to do after the elections, regardless of the outcome given the polarization has occurred. The participants of the elections should come together and reconcile so as to create a peaceful situation as before.
Jakarta's local elections in 2017 have a high level of risk, polarization has occurred, SARA issues have been played, need the cooperation of many parties to prevent the Jakarta's election 2017 became the trigger of a horizontal conflict. With the preparations made by the government's security forces and law enforcement agencies, as well as the expectations of the participants of the elections that would elate and later knight receiving the election results, expected in 2017 election situation can be maintained.
Jakarta's local elections have a high risk, but remained optimistic predictions conducive situation.
*) Stanislaus Riyanta, Intelligence and Terrorismanalysts, Alumni of Sanata Dharma University in Yogyakarta and Graduate Studies in Strategic Intelligence, University of Indonesia.
COPYRIGHT © ANTARA News Megapolitan 2017
Concurrent local elections in 2017 needs to be examined and prepared well, especially at the provincial level in Aceh, Bangka Belitung, Jakarta, Banten, Gorontalo, West Sulawesi and Papua. The vulnerability of the elections at the provincial level was higher than the district or city given area distribution and broader and more diverse participants.
As in the 2015 election,2017 election is expected to be dynamic and challenging. Although labeled democratic party, which befits a party filled with excitement, could be transformed into a democratic party of euphoria and turmoil because of excessive emotion and sentiment. Disappointment over a celebration of democracy to those who did not win is a reasonable and should be prepared by all the candidates, but the disappointment of excessive should be wary because it can take advantage of the masses and lead to horizontal conflict.
Discontent over the elections results, if it is felt that there was fraud, should be prosecuted through the mechanism of positive law, not the law of the jungle to perform an action. Reflecting on the elections in 2015, followed by the 268 area, there were 150 lawsuits filed by parties who are not satisfied with the Constitutional Court. Of the 150 lawsuits there are five lawsuits were taken up by the Constitutional Court.
Electoral conflicts occurred in Indonesia for several times, such as occurred in the district of Tuban, East Java (2006), which resulted in several buildings were damaged. In Tana Toraja, South Sulawesi (2010) electoral conflicts resulting in casualties 1 killed, 10 people were seriously injured and property damage.
Mojokerto regency of East Java (2010) electoral conflicts caused 22 cars were destroyed. Notes on electoral conflicts in the reform era can be written even longer, but the most important is to know that the greatest electoral conflicts caused by the unpreparedness of the participants of the elections to lose.
To deal with the elections in 2017 which dynamic and challenging, it is necessary to do threat analysis, vulnerability analysis and risk analysis as the basis for determining measures of prevention, response and recovery. This move was made to deal with situations that could potentially be a threat to security and order.
Threats
The biggest threat of Jakarta elections in 2017 is the reaction of the parties are not ready to lose. The reaction is carried out by the parties would not accept the election results vary. For those who are aware of law would do a lawsuit against the election results through legal channels in the Constitutional Court. But for those who do not (want to) litigious, will usually use destructive manner by committing acts of terror even frightening and harmful to impose his will.
The possibility of the parties which does not accept the election results could have used a variety of ways, at the top level using legal means positive, but at a lower level living the law of the jungle. If any legal action for acts that violate the law by this party will relinquish responsibility to the perpetrators of the lower level, it will even leveraged the grass root level to mempekeruh atmosphere. Destructive actions more massive if there is a catalyst for sensitive issues such as racial issues.
Parties are predicted to perform a destructive action because it would not accepted the election results usually are most likely to spend a lot of capital, or has already sacrifice something that can not be back again. This happens, for example against a candidate who has lost a career or previous status as a condition that must be removed following the election.
Potential destructive action that occurs by the top candidates is very large, especially if the candidate has ardent supporters and in large numbers. These methods will be used to influence or exert pressure on the decision makers to willingly obey. Model mobilizes the masses and to exert pressure through violence can be controlled so that it becomes a horizontal conflict. Participants who lost the election, refused to accept the election results, would not take legal action, likely to use a destructive way as the overflow disappointment.
Another potential threat in the Jakarta's elections in 2017 is the political money. Although there is a tendency that the voters in Jakarta, including voters with a high degree of rational and not easily tempted by money, but the use of political money is likely to remain there for the taking portions of which remain uncertain voters with voter choice or opportunists. Political money can be made directly with the dawn attack, or by other means such as promises of distribution of money. These methods of course injure democracy and are a potential conflict.
From that analysis, it can be seen that the level of threat in the Jakarta's elections in 2017 is high. This is in addition based on the potential that can happen, also based on events that have occurred in Jakarta, especially concerning SARA.
Insecurity
Blackspots in the Jakarta's election in 2017 if not addressed and managed to be exploited by certain parties as its entrance threat. In general can be a vulnerable point in the election campaign as a violation, the final voters list (DPT) is problematic, counting the election results fraudulent ballots are damaged or not standard, and other things that disrupt the electoral process.
Blackspots will be used as an excuse and triger for those who are not satisfied to carry out actions against the election result.
In addition to technical problems organizing campaigns and elections, the critical points of the Jakarta's elections in 2017 contained in administrative matters relating to the status and eligibility of candidates who follow the regional head elections.
Candidates head affected area or are undergoing legal process is very prone to be such a problem demands or agitation of materials that could lead to conflict between supporters.
Voters' data is very vulnerable to become a source of interference in the Jakarta's election 2017. Suspected double voters or citizens who are not registered will be a source of problems. Source of data voters from e-ID still need to be reviewed again its validity considering e-ID itself is still unfinished 100%.
Logistics election alsoshould be noted carefully so as not to become an obstacle in the implementation of Jakarta's election in 2017. It should remember the national capital and there are no obstacles in Jakarta for geographical and transportation problems, if there are problems on the logistics of the elections would be very embarrassing.
Overcrowding in the Jakarta's election in 2017 will create a security gap, which can be exploited by certain parties who want to create a not conducive situation. Those who may take advantage of this situation are the radical groups, who would use terrorist means to impose interest and show their existence.
Those vulnerabilities should not have happened in the Jakarta's elections in 2017. However, given the political interest is very high, it is possible the parties create the vulnerability to be exploited as the entrance to the threat of disruption to the Jakarta's elections in 2017.
From the description, the author considers that the level of insecurity in the Jakarta’s election in 2017 is still at the middle level (medium). So that needs hard work from Jakarta's General Election Commissions, Jakarta's Supervisory Board of Elections, security forces and the community as participants Jakarta’s election to both maintain that the vulnerability does not become a trigger of the disorder Jakarta's election in 2017.
The Risk
The risk is calculated from the chance of adverse events and the impact of the incident. Adverse events such as horizontal conflict occurred several times after the counting of votes is done by the parties do not accept the results. In the elections there must be winners and there are losers. For that need to be taken into account the risk of adverse events in the Jakarta's election in 2017 because the losing side does not accept the Jakarta's election results in 2017.
Seeing the political tension is high enough for this, especially during the election campaign in 2017, then the chances of adverse events such as horizontal conflicts might happen. Electoral conflicts, especially if it has been embellished by elements of SARA will potentially be a horizontal conflict widens and out of the context of the elections. Seeing frequency noise that occurs during the Jakarta's election campaign in 2017 it can be assessed that the chances of occurrence of adverse events in the 2017 elections, especially the horizontal conflict is at the medium level.
The impact in the event of conflict on the elections, the city is estimated at the level of medium-heavy. It is based on the assessment that there has been a polarization of the current groups and classes in society. Polarization is forming camps will face each other. Advantages of the Jakarta's election was followed by three (3) pairs of candidates so that the polarization is not too extreme occurred despite the fact that elections in Jakarta looked dominant faction fight between the incumbent and not the incumbent.
With the level of the opportunities that are and the estimated impact on the level of moderate to severe, then the risk of Jakarta's election in 2017 is rated at a high level (can be seen on the risk matrix). To prevent adverse events in the local elections in 2017 necessary steps as a residual, so that high risk can be prevented, or treated properly if it occurs, and can be recovered to return to the normal situation.
Prevention
Risk can be managed by the strategic steps that consists of 4 stages (Prunckun: 2015), namely prevention, preparedness, emergency response or response and recovery or PPRR (Prevention, Preparation, Response, Recovery). Prevention can be done by eliminating the threat components that did not happen. Threat components consist of goodwill, encouragement, knowledge and resources (Prunckun: 2015).
Intention and encouragement are needed so that threat does not occur and can be controlled if in the electoral process, the parties that are not satisfied with the outcome of the elections would be gentle and accept whatever result as a consequence of a fight. If not encouragement from the losers, then there should be no parties are doing a disservice.
Intention to do a disservice must be eliminated with the realization that there is a greater importance of the elections results, namely the unity of the nation. Candidate of Regional Head Election participants should be ready with the results of the election, or if it is not satisfied with the election results they should use constitutional means through the Constitutional Court and not by encouraging their supporters to act with others.
Conflict prevention can also be carried out by the security forces and intelligence mainly by showing the presence and assertive stance and neutral so that the parties that could potentially be a source of threat should rethink carry out the action.
Preparations that need to be done to deal with threats after prevention can not be done or assume that the threat will occur is by dialogue and approaches to elements of society. Approach to political leaders, religious leaders, community leaders, and other components that need to be done in order to create a strong communication and networking. This is necessary if the threat to the elections in 2017 the case then do the handling persuasively by many parties, while avoiding polarization, between groups of people, or between a source of conflict with law enforcement officials.
The security forces and law enforcement in this case IS the Police. They certainly not in doubt. Police confirmed with the device already preparing troops to confront the Democratic Party in Jakarta. But the role of the police certainly will not be maximized if it is not supported by the community as participants in the elections. For the community and the police need to work together, especially in the early prevention and early detection of threats.
If the threat to the elections as horizontal conflicts occur, then steps must be carried out as a response needs to consider the impact that will occur. Steps need to done as persuasive and dialogue. But if the threat occurs is harmful then of course the police authority to conduct measurable action and appropriate procedures to prevent such occurrences spread or cause more losses.
When a threat occurs and handling have been done then the important thing to do is to recover the situation. It is even necessary to do after the elections, regardless of the outcome given the polarization has occurred. The participants of the elections should come together and reconcile so as to create a peaceful situation as before.
Jakarta's local elections in 2017 have a high level of risk, polarization has occurred, SARA issues have been played, need the cooperation of many parties to prevent the Jakarta's election 2017 became the trigger of a horizontal conflict. With the preparations made by the government's security forces and law enforcement agencies, as well as the expectations of the participants of the elections that would elate and later knight receiving the election results, expected in 2017 election situation can be maintained.
Jakarta's local elections have a high risk, but remained optimistic predictions conducive situation.
*) Stanislaus Riyanta, Intelligence and Terrorismanalysts, Alumni of Sanata Dharma University in Yogyakarta and Graduate Studies in Strategic Intelligence, University of Indonesia.
Pewarta: Stanislaus Riyanta *)
Editor : M. Tohamaksun
COPYRIGHT © ANTARA News Megapolitan 2017