Money Politics is The Forerunner of Electoral Corruption
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.46799/ijssr.v2i8.152Keywords:
Money Politics, Money Politics Crime, General Elections in IndonesiaAbstract
Buying and selling votes seems to be an endemic practice in many democracies and is not new. Money politics is essentially a disease of democracy in any country. There is a ghost of money politics hanging around every election. It manifests through the exchange of votes for money, goods or services offered by candidates or support teams to voters. Money politics has become a language that brings together interactions between politicians and voters and is the central point of campaigning in the General or Regional Elections in Indonesia. Money politics is a fraudulent act in General Elections, essentially the same as corruption. Money politics is not in rhythm and is compounded to hold elections. This study uses a qualitative approach to discuss how the relationship between the practice of money politics and electoral corruption is rampant at every democratic party in Indonesia in the current reform era. First, in this study's results, money politics is a typical Indonesian terminology. Second, criminal sanctions do not provide a deterrent effect for perpetrators. Third, an open proportional system opens the door for vote buying and selling.
References
Adji, I. S. (2014). Administrative Penal Law: ke Arah Konstruksi Pidana Limitatif. Pelatihan Hukum Pidana & Kriminologi, 1–27. Google Scholar
Alkostar, A. (2008). Korupsi Politik di Negara Modern, FH. UII Press, Yogyakarta. Google Scholar
Aspinall, E. (2014). When brokers betray: Clientelism, social networks, and electoral politics in Indonesia. Critical Asian Studies, 46(4), 545–570. Google Scholar
Aspinall, E. (2015). Politik uang di Indonesia: Patronase dan klientelisme pada pemilu legislatif 2014. Research Centre for Politics and Government, Department of Politics Google Scholar
Birch, S. (2009). Electoral Corruption. In The SAGE Handbook of Comparative Politics (p. 394). https://doi.org/https://doi.org/ 10.4135/9780857021083.n2. Google Scholar
Bumke, D. (2010). Challenging democratization: money politics and local democracy in Indonesia. Political Studies Graduate Conference, 6-7 December 2010. Google Scholar
Choi, N. (2004). Local elections and party politics in post-Reformasi Indonesia: a view from Yogyakarta. Contemporary Southeast Asia: A Journal of International and Strategic Affairs, 26(2), 280–301. Google Scholar
Corstange, D. (2012). Vote trafficking in Lebanon. International Journal of Middle East Studies, 44(3), 483–505. Google Scholar
Dressler, J. (2001). Why keep the provocation defense: some reflections on a difficult subject. Minn. L. Rev., 86, 959. Google Scholar
Ellis, A. (2016). Indonesia: Kontinuitas, Kesepakatan dan Konsensus. Stokholm Press.
Estlund, D. (2012). The Oxford handbook of political philosophy. Oxford University Press. Google Scholar
Hidayat, S. (2006). Bisnis dan Politik di tingkat lokal: Pengusaha, penguasa, dan penyelenggara pemerintahan daerah pasca pilkada. Jakarta: Lembaga Ilmu Pengetahuan Indonesia (LIPI), Pusat Penelitian (P2E). Google Scholar
Hodess, R. (2004). Global Corruption Report 2004: Political Corruption. Google Scholar
Irawan, A., Dahlan, A., Fariz, D., & Putri, A. G. (2014). Panduan pemantauan korupsi pemilu. Indonesia Corruption Watch (ICW). Google Scholar
Larry, J. S. (2012). Criminology, wadsworth Cenggage Learning. Google Scholar
Muhtadi, B. (2013). Politik uang dan dinamika elektoral di Indonesia. Google Scholar
Muhtadi, B. (2020). Kuasa Uang. Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia. Google Scholar
Pahlevi, M. E. T., & Amrurobbi, A. A. (2020). Pendidikan Politik dalam Pencegahan Politik Uang Melalui Gerakan Masyarakat Desa. INTEGRITAS: Jurnal Antikorupsi, 6(1), 141–152. Google Scholar
Satria, H. (2018). Dagang Fasilitas di Sukamiskin.
Satria, H. (2019). Politik Hukum Tindak Pidana Politik Uang dalam Pemilihan Umum di Indonesia. Integritas: Jurnal Antikorupsi, 5(1), 1–14. Google Scholar
Schaffer, F. C. (2007). Elections for sale: The causes and consequences of vote buying. Lynne Rienner Publishers Boulder, CO. Google Scholar
Selb, P., & Lutz, G. (2015). Lone fighters: Intraparty competition, interparty competition, and candidates' vote-seeking efforts in open-ballot PR elections. Electoral Studies, 39, 329–337. Scopus
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2022 Amalia Syauket
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International. that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
