The Irony of a Single Candidate in the 2024 Regional Elections
The General Election Commission noted that 37 regions in the 2024 national simultaneous regional head elections will only have a single candidate. This number may still change if there is a nomination dispute and it is granted by the Election Supervisory Board.
The Constitutional Court Decision Number 60 of 2024 concerning the Threshold for Nomination Requirements, which makes it easier for political parties to nominate candidates for regional heads, has in fact not borne fruit. It cannot prevent the emergence of many single candidates. Political parties in a number of regions prefer to collaborate with one big political force.
The phenomenon of single candidates in regional elections is not new. In the 2015 Pilkada, for example, single candidates began to appear and the number continued to climb significantly.
In fact, in the 2020 simultaneous regional elections in the era of the Covid-19 pandemic, there are 25 regions with only a single candidate.
The problem of single candidates is quite complex, ranging from the issue of political party regeneration to financial matters.
Read also: Citizens are not empty boxes
Of course, it is very ironic because regional elections are an arena for competition between political parties to win strategic public positions. Moreover, advancing candidates has become easier to do with the latest Constitutional Court ruling. Unfortunately, this golden opportunity is not well utilized by political parties.
Fatwa Robert Dahl (1971) introduced that a democratic state is characterized by two important things, namely the existence of a free competition space guaranteed by the state and active political participation of citizens in elections. Therefore, a single candidate in an election clearly collides with the rules of healthy democracy.
The 2016 Pilkada Regulation states that if there is a single candidate in a region, the vote is still held in accordance with applicable regulations. On a technical level, the ballot paper contains two columns. One column contains a photo of the candidate pair, while the other column is an empty box without any pictures. Empty box is the term for the opponent of a single candidate.
Historically, a single candidate against an empty box is almost certain to win, although there was an exception in the 2018 Makassar City Pilkada where an empty box won. However, after that, it has never been heard of an empty box winning an election.
In the midst of voters who tend to be apathetic and transactional, the possibility of an empty box winning again is difficult. Despite the onerous provision that a single candidate will be declared the winner if they garner more than 50 percent of the valid votes, the graph of empty box defeats continues to rise rapidly.
The power of oligarchy
There are a number of recent facts that are worth pointing out regarding the emergence of dozens of single candidates against empty boxes in local elections.
First, the power of political and economic oligarchs. It must be recognized that the issue of candidacy for regional head candidates is entirely in the hands of key political party elites. This reality confirms Robert Michels' argument that modern organizations such as political parties can never be separated from the strong grip of the iron law of oligarchy.
Jeffrey Winters (2011) reinforces Robert Michels' rationalization that oligarchs are not only in full control of politics, but also have access to economic resources that can orchestrate whether or not someone can run for regional elections.
The success story of a single candidate in the regional elections is very likely to be applied in the presidential and vice presidential elections.
Oligarchs are few in number, but their position is very superior and dominant. In fact, the oligarchy is a key actor in the process of determining regional election candidates.
Second, the weak regeneration of political parties. The main function of political parties is the nomination of candidates, which in full definition means that political parties are obliged to recruit candidates who are able to represent the party in general elections (Larry Diamond and Richard Gunther, 2001).
The phenomenon of a single candidate indicates that political parties are weak in regenerating prospective leaders and prefer to carry other political parties' heroes. This is a shortcut that is commonly done collectively by the oligarchs in this country. It is oriented towards short-term pragmatic interests only.
Political parties should have the courage to promote internal candidates in the regional elections. Losing and winning is a later matter. The problem of regeneration has been an acute problem for a long time and political parties are not seriously improving. Political parties are so distant from the constituents.
In every electoral political event, political parties stutter to advance their own candidates. Not only is it unpopular and not only has minimal progress, political parties in the regions do not have cadres that are worth relying on.
Third, political costs are expensive. In a number of regions, political parties do not dare to endorse candidates because of the high political costs of competing. Whatever the title, electoral politics such as regional elections require adequate logistics.
The massive vote-buying culture, the high political dowry of candidacy, including the high cost of consolidating political machines, are the reasons why political parties do not have the courage to endorse candidates. In effect, political parties are forced to choose shortcuts by partnering with other candidates who are considered financially and politically strong.
Single candidate ban
The government and the House of Representatives need to capture the inner mood of the people who want a ban on single candidates in regional elections.
This country must prohibit single candidates because it violates the nature of democracy, which requires fair and open political competition. Do not let a big political force buy up all political parties to fight an empty box.
Audiences hope that the executive and legislative branches will start thinking adaptively about how to fence off the maximum limit of political party coalitions that can avoid single candidates. If regulatory efforts are not made, in the future the number of single candidates against empty boxes will continue to appear.
The number can double, increasing significantly. There must be political engineering to avoid such brutal politics by buying up all political parties. The practice of buying all political parties is a serious threat to democracy, which requires healthy competition.
Political parties in a number of regions prefer to collaborate with one big political force.
A single candidate allows a figure who is not wanted by the people, with a bad track record, even controversial, such as an ex-convict, to be elected as a regional head because he is able to buy all political parties. In the end, the law of the political jungle applies. Moreover, there are fewer and fewer independent candidates.
In the future, local politics will be even darker, haunted by the octopus of a single candidate. Therefore, if there are no rules about the maximum number of coalitions in the local elections to avoid single candidates, it is certain that in the future there will be a similar phenomenon where certain political forces will carry all political parties in a large coalition.
The success story of a single candidate in the regional elections is very likely to be applied in the presidential and vice presidential elections. Moreover, many political party elites are currently held hostage by legal cases. It is very easy of course to buy all political parties.
Adi Prayitno, Lecturer in Political Science at FISIP UIN Jakarta and Executive Director of Political Parameters