对印尼金钱政治执法制裁的质疑

Mirawati Saktiana, Zudan Arif Fakhrulloh
{"title":"对印尼金钱政治执法制裁的质疑","authors":"Mirawati Saktiana, Zudan Arif Fakhrulloh","doi":"10.29303/ulrev.v6i2.206","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"General elections, which are held on a regular basis to elect leaders in a country, are a sign of a democracy. The ruling of the Constitutional Court, which specifies that elections in Indonesia be held concurrently, both national and local elections, undoubtedly produces dynamics and obstacles in election administration. It is evident that the practice of electoral fraud is inextricably linked to the conduct of elections in Indonesia. Starting with indirect elections, Indonesia has now moved on to direct elections. Because the execution is simultaneous and simultaneous, the concentration of election organizers and supervisors is split. Although there is already an Election lAW that regulates law enforcement for election offenses, the existence of these provisions is regarded ineffective and inefficient in areas where there are still numerous frauds in elections, including money politics. This paper will look at the regulation of vote buying (money politics) and how sanctions are used. Using primary, secondary, and tertiary legal texts, this study employs a normative legal writing technique. This study concludes that the regulation of criminal punishments in money politics fraud has been regulated in Elections Law Number 7 of 2017. Although infractions of legal politics are restricted under the a quo Law, these arrangements have not been totally effective in limiting the degree of election violations and crimes, particularly money politics. As a result, it should be reconsidered by considering other administrative fines for political parties or candidate candidates in order to offer a greater deterrent impact.","PeriodicalId":406021,"journal":{"name":"Unram Law Review","volume":"264 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-10-30","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Query Of The Sanctions For Enforcement Of Money Politics In Indonesia\",\"authors\":\"Mirawati Saktiana, Zudan Arif Fakhrulloh\",\"doi\":\"10.29303/ulrev.v6i2.206\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"General elections, which are held on a regular basis to elect leaders in a country, are a sign of a democracy. The ruling of the Constitutional Court, which specifies that elections in Indonesia be held concurrently, both national and local elections, undoubtedly produces dynamics and obstacles in election administration. It is evident that the practice of electoral fraud is inextricably linked to the conduct of elections in Indonesia. Starting with indirect elections, Indonesia has now moved on to direct elections. Because the execution is simultaneous and simultaneous, the concentration of election organizers and supervisors is split. Although there is already an Election lAW that regulates law enforcement for election offenses, the existence of these provisions is regarded ineffective and inefficient in areas where there are still numerous frauds in elections, including money politics. This paper will look at the regulation of vote buying (money politics) and how sanctions are used. Using primary, secondary, and tertiary legal texts, this study employs a normative legal writing technique. This study concludes that the regulation of criminal punishments in money politics fraud has been regulated in Elections Law Number 7 of 2017. Although infractions of legal politics are restricted under the a quo Law, these arrangements have not been totally effective in limiting the degree of election violations and crimes, particularly money politics. As a result, it should be reconsidered by considering other administrative fines for political parties or candidate candidates in order to offer a greater deterrent impact.\",\"PeriodicalId\":406021,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Unram Law Review\",\"volume\":\"264 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-10-30\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Unram Law Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.29303/ulrev.v6i2.206\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Unram Law Review","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.29303/ulrev.v6i2.206","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

为选出国家领导人而定期举行的大选是民主主义的标志。宪法法院的裁决规定印度尼西亚的全国和地方选举应同时举行,这无疑在选举管理方面产生了动力和障碍。很明显,选举舞弊的做法与印度尼西亚的选举行为有着不可分割的联系。从间接选举开始,印尼现在已经转向直接选举。因为执行是同时进行和同时进行的,所以选举组织者和监督人员的集中是分散的。虽然现行的《选举法》规定了对选举犯罪的执法,但在金钱政治等选举舞弊现象较多的地区,这些规定的存在被认为是无效和低效的。本文将探讨对贿选(金钱政治)的监管以及如何实施制裁。本研究使用初级、二级和三级法律文本,采用规范的法律写作技巧。本研究的结论是,2017年第7号选举法对金钱政治欺诈的刑事处罚进行了规定。虽然违反法律政治的行为受到《维持现状法》的限制,但这些安排并没有完全有效地限制违反选举和犯罪的程度,特别是金钱政治。因此,应该重新考虑对政党或候选人进行其他行政处罚,以发挥更大的威慑作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Query Of The Sanctions For Enforcement Of Money Politics In Indonesia
General elections, which are held on a regular basis to elect leaders in a country, are a sign of a democracy. The ruling of the Constitutional Court, which specifies that elections in Indonesia be held concurrently, both national and local elections, undoubtedly produces dynamics and obstacles in election administration. It is evident that the practice of electoral fraud is inextricably linked to the conduct of elections in Indonesia. Starting with indirect elections, Indonesia has now moved on to direct elections. Because the execution is simultaneous and simultaneous, the concentration of election organizers and supervisors is split. Although there is already an Election lAW that regulates law enforcement for election offenses, the existence of these provisions is regarded ineffective and inefficient in areas where there are still numerous frauds in elections, including money politics. This paper will look at the regulation of vote buying (money politics) and how sanctions are used. Using primary, secondary, and tertiary legal texts, this study employs a normative legal writing technique. This study concludes that the regulation of criminal punishments in money politics fraud has been regulated in Elections Law Number 7 of 2017. Although infractions of legal politics are restricted under the a quo Law, these arrangements have not been totally effective in limiting the degree of election violations and crimes, particularly money politics. As a result, it should be reconsidered by considering other administrative fines for political parties or candidate candidates in order to offer a greater deterrent impact.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信