The draft revision of the Election Law (RUU) has sparked debate regarding the implementation of simultaneous regional elections. The question is, what are the positive and negative sides if the presidential, legislative, and regional head elections are held simultaneously in 2024? What are the positive and negative sides if the simultaneous regional elections are brought forward to 2022 and 2023?
To answer a series of questions, the Populi Forum raised the theme "The Chaos of Simultaneous Elections" on Thursday (4/2/2021). Several speakers were present in this discussion, namely Bahtiar (Director General of Politics and General Government, Ministry of Home Affairs), Djohermansyah Djohan (Regional Autonomy Expert), Dahlia Umar (Chair, Network for Indonesia Democratic Society), and Mada Sukmajati (Lecturer, Department of Politics and Government, UGM).
Former Director General of Regional Autonomy of the Ministry of Home Affairs and Former Acting Governor of Riau, Djohermansyah Djohan said that in fact the public does not need to worry about the quantity or quality of Acting Regional Heads if the Pilkada is still held in 2024. In fact, it is very possible that the quality of the Acting Regional Heads will be better than the regional heads from the electoral process, because of the bureaucratic experience they already have. He added that the shortcomings of the Acting Regional Heads are only in the aspect of legitimacy from the people because they are not the result of an electoral process.
Meanwhile, Dahlia Umar said, in terms of holding elections, perhaps the problem is not in their simultaneity, but in the chosen election system. This can be seen from the complexity that the public must face when opening legislative ballots. Of course, this cannot be separated from the establishment of an open proportional system in legislative elections. Meanwhile, if the 2022 Pilkada continues to be forced, then there are a number of aspects that must be considered seriously, such as transparency of political financing, campaign funds, accountability, women's representation, and others are truly resolved properly. The full presentation can be seen here .
Mada Sukmajati gave an explanation from the political side. According to him, the chaos in the discussion of the general election is something normal, and shows that the democratic system is running well. He added that the discussion of the revision of the election law should not only be to think about the interests of one or two people, but also need to look at institutional engineering. That way, the direction of the election system in the future becomes clear. Another important point is that often the ratification of the election law is too hasty with the planned stages. In fact, the things that need to be prepared are not only the organizers, but also the participants, and even the voters.
Closing the discussion, Djohermansyah Djohan added that changes to the election law are normal because our political conditions are dynamic, as long as they are based on research-based evaluations. Meanwhile, Dahlia said that if the election is held simultaneously in 2024, it does not mean that the KPU does not have work outside the election year. Here, there is still pre-election and post-election work, such as archiving, data and information, as well as research and voter education. In his closing statement, Mada Sukmajati said that the election battle had started from the rules of the game in the law or policy being formulated, not at the time of the election. What is important is how civil society also colors the process of making election laws and minimizes personal and elitist influences.
English 
Indonesian