Tinjauan Sistem Proporsional Terbuka Dalam Pemilu Legislatif 2019 Terhadap Dinamika Demokrasi Di Indonesia

Studi Kasus Di Kota Pekan Baru

Authors

  • M Rizqi Azmi UIR
  • Riko Riyanda

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.25299/uirlrev.2020.vol4(2).5858

Keywords:

Sistem Proporsional Terbuka, Pemilu Legislatif, Demokrasi

Abstract

In the 2019 DPR RI and Provincial, Regency and City (DPRD) DPRD elections, elections were conducted through an open proportional system. In Pekanbaru City, they also feel the same enthusiasm, proportional euphoria is open to election participants. However, this system also contains weaknesses according to the theory, including: Voters' political participation is damaged by political pragmatism in competing for votes so that on the one hand money politics or vote buying and selling are more prevalent, on the other hand political costs are getting more expensive, which encourages the people to corruption. Second, political parties are still dominated by a handful of people who created Politic Oligarch. From the results of the study, it shows that party elites and the voting community in Pekanbaru prefer an open proportional system in the 2019 legislative elections compared to closed proportional ones, there are several considerations such as: (1) An open proportional system is fair enough for legislative competition and can increase transparency in Elections. (2) With an open proportion, it can educate voters through campaign programs. (3) By using any system, the space for political money will always be open. (4) Lower serial numbers still have the opportunity to gain votes. (5) The open proportional system further legitimizes the people's sovereignty in the closed proportional area. (6) The open proportional system further increases voter participation.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

A.Z. Nasution, 1995, Konsumen dan Hukum, Sinar Harapan, Jakarta.

Diamond, Larry dan Leonardo Molino. 2005. “Asseesing The Qualitt of Democarcy”. The John Hopkins University Press, Biltomore.

Habernas, Jurgen. 1996. “Between Factsand Norm”. Polity Press, Cambride.

Revitch, Diare dan Abiggil Therstrom (ed). 2005. Demokrasi Klasik dan Modern ditejemahkan oleh Hermoyo. Jakarta: Yayasan Obor Indonesia, Jakarta.

Robert, Andrew. 2010. “The Quallity of Democracy in Eastern Europe: Publik Prefernces and Policy Reform. “ University Press, Cambride.

Santoyo Purwo, 2014 “Merancang Arah Baru Demokrasi Indonesia Pasca Reformasi”, KPG (Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia), Jakarta.

Sugiono, 2012. MEetode Penelitian Kuantitatif, Kualitatif dan R & D. Alfabeta, Bandung

Shumpeter Joseph. 1950. Capitalism, Sosialism, and Democracy. Happer, Network.

Pito Andrianus Toni et all. 2006. Mengenal Teori-Teori Politik Dari Sistem Politik Samoai Korupsi. Nuansa, Bandung.

Yin, RK 2011. Qualititative Research: Form Star to Finish, N.Y: The Guiford Press, NY.

Ayu Pertiwi Diah, Sistem Pemilu Proporsional Daftar Di Indonesia: Melahirkan Korupsi Politik? Jurnal Trias Politica, Universitas Riau Kepulauan, Vol.2, No.1, PP.1-14.2018.

Doni Ramdani Muhammad dan Fahmi Arisandi. Pengaruh Penggunaan Sistem Pemilihan Umum Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Proporsional Daftar Terbuka. Jurnal Reehtsvinding. Univeristas 17 Agustus 1945. Vol,3.PP.1-11, 2014.

Silalahi Agus, “Korelasi Pengaturan Sistem Pemilu Proporsional Terbuka Barbasis Suara Terbanyak Dengan Korupsi Politik di Indonesia”. Jurnal Yustisia, Univeristas 11 Maret. Vol 4.No.1.PP.1-14, 2015.

https://www.republika.co.id/berita/nasional/politik/14/03/19/n2o11c-hasil-riset-ini- jumlah- diakses tanggal 17 agustus 2019.

Downloads

Published

2020-10-25