Election fraud can be a time bomb when there is a dispute over election results. Suspected instances of fraud include money politics and the mobilization of Civil Servants (ASN). Tolerating any form of election fraud will impact the election process and results, leading to a lack of trust from the people.
“This serves as a reminder to election organizers to be neutral and independent, including other government agencies. Elections are indeed a competition, and everyone wants to win, but don’t forget that the public is also monitoring the electoral process,” said Khoirunnisa Agustyati, Executive Director of the Association for Elections and Democracy (Perkumpulan untuk Pemilu dan Demokrasi or Perludem), in Jakarta (12/8).
Khoirunnisa mentioned that common violations during the campaign period include voter data accuracy, money politics, and the neutrality of Civil Servants (ASN). According to her, if the parties suspected of bias cannot demonstrate neutrality, it will result in public distrust of the ongoing efforts to reform the bureaucracy.
Additionally, she also expressed regret over the Election Supervisory Body (Badan Pengawas Pemilihan Umum or Bawaslu) not utilizing its authority to the fullest. According to her, Bawaslu has significant authority for the prevention and enforcement of violations during elections.
“It should be that Bawaslu is more progressive and not just textbook; if not explicitly regulated by the law, they feel they cannot go further,” she said.
Furthermore, according to Khoirunnisa, the House of Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat or DPR) as a legislative institution with a supervisory function can continue to encourage Bawaslu to work more effectively.
Given the brief campaign period and the importance of promptly following up on allegations of fraud, whether discovered or reported.
According to Khoirunnisa, what is needed now is a massive movement from the public to collectively oversee the conduct of the elections. With the advancing technology, the public can quickly disseminate information, especially regarding election fraud.
“Election organizers and existing institutions must feel that the public is continuously monitoring them,” she concluded. 
Translated by Catherine Natalia