Election fatigue or elite shenanigans? Why fewer Indonesians went to polls to elect their local leaders

Fewer Indonesians exercised their voting rights in the last round of regional elections, raising further questions about the state of democracy in the country.

According to the General Elections Commission (KPU), only 71 percent of eligible voters nationwide cast votes in the country’s first simultaneous regional elections on 27 November. This is a much lower turnout than for the 2018 regional elections, when 81 percent of the voters chose to take part.

In major provinces such as Jakarta, Banten, West Java, and North Sumatra, the figures plunged drastically. In the capital, the participation rate fell to 57.52 percent, a 20-percentage-point drop from the previous election. This means 3.4 million Jakarta’s voters chose to sit out the November elections. Only in Central Java and East Java did the election participation rates increase.

Many have offered their explanations for this concerning trend. Some, including KPU officials, have suggested that voters are suffering election fatigue. This is the first time ever that Indonesia held legislative elections, the presidential elections, and nationwide regional elections in the same year.

KPU commissioner Idham Kholik was quoted by Antara as saying that election fatigue was a real problem that should be addressed. “If such a situation arises, there is a potential for decreased participation. Meanwhile, we have a mandate to increase voter turnout.”

I agree that  election fatigue is clearly a factor, and three major elections in a single year is perhaps too much for many Indonesians. But the main reason Indonesian voters chose not to take part this year is because they no longer serve as an avenue for them to channel their political aspirations.

The high-profile election in Jakarta is a case in point.

Why Jakartans sat out the gubernatorial election

Low participation rates in local elections are a paradox of regional autonomy. Decentralisation is intended to strengthen the bonds between citizens and their leaders, who are elected to provide basic public services at the local level. Ideally, the people should be more interested in taking part in local than national elections, not the other way around.

But the low election turnout in Jakarta indicates that the public now seem to believe that they have little influence over election outcomes. Public trust in local legislative and executive institutions is declining due to their inability, or refusal, to accommodate public aspirations. Moreover, the election system is becoming less inclusive.

There is no question that many Jakartans had high hopes that Anies Baswedan and Basuki “Ahok” Tjahaja Purnama would contest the elections again. It is telling that the two most popular gubernatorial contenders in the capital were not on the ballots, which could explain why many have chosen to ignore the electoral contest.

In Jakarta, calls for abstention on election day mounted after it was clear that Anies would not be a candidate for re-election, reportedly due to pressure imposed on his political backers, who dropped him.

Thus, while KPU’s claim of election fatigue may be valid, it does not explain why participation rates remained stable in East Java but declined in Jakarta. This shows that, if anything, the people are tired of elite orchestration of elections, and not elections per se. By this logic, more people would have voted had the elections been more inclusive.

The great divide between elite and the rest

Elite orchestrations were more visible than ever in this year’s regional elections.

They were characterised by national elite competition, especially in key electoral provinces critical to victory in the legislative and presidential elections, mainly on the islands of Java, Sumatra and Sulawesi.

These regions became battlegrounds for intra-elite conflicts, most between the coalition of political parties supporting the Prabowo Subianto government (KIM, Koalisi Indonesia Maju-Plus, Advance Indonesia Coalition-Plus) and the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the party with the largest number of seats in the national legislature, and now the only opposition party.

The proxy political struggles between the PDIP and KIM Plus, which is backed by former president Joko “Jokowi” Widodo,  set the tone for elections in the regions.

This resulted in local elections being no longer a political process to elect the most qualified and representative leaders, but, more often, a political gambit by the national elite to grow their political capital for the next legislative and presidential elections.

While Jokowi’s and Prabowo’s endorsement of the KIM Plus-backed candidates is not illegal, it certainly raises ethical concerns. Moreover, it undermines the fairness of elections in the regional level, given their ability to mobilise state resources to sway election results.

In Jakarta, Prabowo and Jokowi used their influence to influence the gubernatorial race, where  the KIM-Plus-backed candidate pair, Ridwan Kamil and Suswono, competed against PDI-P-backed candidate pair, Pramono Anung and Rano Karno. Prabowo instructed the local Gerindra party officials to mobilise support for Ridwan, while Jokowi allegedly rallied his loyalists in public office, including active police officials and the acting governor. Their open support in certain regions suggested that winning these areas was crucial for their future political plans.

That Anies supported the Pramono-Rano pair is a huge red flag for the Prabowo-Jokowi-led coalition, considering the former Jakarta governor won the most votes in the capital for the 2024 presidential election. Anies had his revenge for being locked out of the gubernatorial race – the Prabowo-Jokowi alliance succeeded in preventing him from contesting it, but failed to help Ridwan win. This was the case despite hundreds of local government officials being mobilised less than two weeks before voting day.

The gubernatorial election in Jakarta is a grim example of how cartel politics is undermining Indonesian democracy by pushing the voters away from the electoral process. This has further deepened the political divide between the elite and the rest of the population, who have become more and more politically apathetic as elite meddling in the electoral process intensifies.

The old narrative that elections are a “people’s festival”–a manifestation of the people’s political sovereignty–now rings hollow to many Indonesians, especially in Jakarta. Local elections have become a political game only the elite can play, leaving voters out in the cold.