7/23 In Asia

In Asia Malaysians Debate New Subsidy Cuts on Fuel, Sugar July 22, 2010 at 8:04 AM By Anthea Mulakala More Malaysians may soon request one sugar instead of two in their teh tarik and opt for the bus rather than the car for their commute to work. On July 18, 2010, Prime Minister Najib Tun Razak’s announced cuts to subsidies on items such as sugar and fuel. This is the first step in the government’s subsidy rationalization programme that it argues will save the country RM 750 million (over $233 million) this year. Money, they say, that can instead be used as resources for families, communities, and business growth. This comes at a time when the Malaysian economy has strongly rebounded from the global financial crisis with double digit growth and Najib’s administration enjoys a healthy public satisfaction rate of 72 percent. The headline news on these subsidy cuts has spurred interesting reactions across the country. The banking and finance sector has generally lauded the move, arguing that the reforms would contribute to a reduction in the nation’s budget deficit and prevent a Greece-style meltdown. Meanwhile, political pundits speculate that the subsidy slash could have a negative effect on the vote base of Malaysia’s ruling political party, Barisan Nasional, just ahead of a general election scheduled for sometime before 2013. Opposition leader Anwar Ibrahim criticized the reforms as a burden on poor households who, he says, will feel most the effects of the cost increase of everyday items. However, several non-governmental organizations that normally protest such cuts actually welcomed the move. The president of the Malaysian Medical Association (MMA) Dr. David Quek, pointed out that as diabetes cases in Malaysia have almost doubled since 2000, the reduction in the sugar subsidy by U.S. 8 cents per kilogram could lead to an eventual reduction in sugar consumption and an improvement in overall nutrition. The Federation of Sundry Goods Merchants Associations of Malaysia echoed his sentiment, adding that Malaysia’s sugar prices are still among the lowest in the region – even after the 8 cents increase. Malaysia’s largest consumer association, FOMCA, claims the petrol price increase of U.S. 0.016 cents per litre should not be a burden for consumers as Malaysians have enjoyed very low rates for petrol and sugar, especially when compared to neighboring countries. In fact, such favorable rates have resulted in lucrative, but illegal, cross-border smuggling of sugar and fuel. Public support for the subsidy reform will increase if Malaysians see their government putting the extra money to good use, like development of a better public transport system and stronger investments in education and health. At the same time, people are more likely to accept the cuts if they feel “rationalization” is a shared responsibility – to apply not just to the people, but to government officials’ spending, as well. In many minds, the greatest public savings will come from reduced leakage, corruption, and cronyism within the government. Malaysians will be watching to see if the government does its part. Anthea Mulakala is The Asia Foundation’s Country Representative in Malaysia. She can be reached at amulakala@asiafound.org. A Conversation with Times of India Diplomatic Editor Indrani Bagchi July 22, 2010 at 8:03 AM In Asia recently spoke with Indian journalist Indrani Bagchi, diplomatic editor for The Times of India, the country’s largest English-language daily, on her way back from Washington, D.C., where she finished conducting research on U.S.-China relations and their impact on India, as an Asia Foundation Chang-Lin Tien Visiting Fellow. Bagchi speaks on rising print newspaper readership in India, President Obama's upcoming visit to India, and more. Q: What domestic and international issues are the Indian media covering well? India’s domestic issues still remain the biggest thing that we cover. There is so much to cover within India on any given day in terms of crises, developments, politics. The quantum of stories from the domestic sector is just enormous. But for those of us who cover foreign policy, it's always a fight for space with the domestic editors. At night, when everybody’s lobbying for last minute space, it's a battle. Q: Is this a reflection of a decrease in foreign coverage globally? Possibly, but in India it also has to do with our newspaper’s revenue model. We are completely advertisement-led. We charge only 2 rupees for our paper, which is about 4 cents, but it takes something like 12 to 15 rupees to produce. The paper is 60 pages, in all color, so we have to make up for this somehow. Our ad to editorial ratio is 40/60: 40 percent advertising and 60 percent editorial. This means we are also fighting with the ad department all the time. It’s a daily battle, and it happens everywhere. Q: You say that print newspaper readership is on the rise in India – a contrast to newspapers in the U.S. and elsewhere struggling to find the right business model to survive. A: Yes, that’s true. Internet penetration is still not that high in India. Because of this, the print newspaper remains a huge source of information. It also remains a key source of advertising for very interesting sectors. The education sector is one of the biggest advertisers in India’s print media. Q: But is this concentrated mostly in the urban areas where literacy rates are higher? There has actually been a huge increase in readership in smaller towns too. We publish 11 different editions that we distribute throughout India. Then we have what we call the Dak editions; it’s an old British term, but it’s an Indian word that means “post.” And it means that you have an earlier edition for outlying areas that take longer to reach. The last edition off the press is what we call the capital edition, which is distributed in the city center. For every 60 kilometers, we have a different edition that goes out slightly earlier or later, depending on the distance from Delhi. But the increase in readership is also because people from the countryside are coming out of illiteracy every day. As people get out of illiteracy, the first thing that they do is read newspapers. Our official circulation is 5.5 million. But in India, circulation and readership are two very different numbers, because every family has one paper, so the readership is actually 3.5 readers to one paper, because families are large and they all share one copy. So the real circulation is almost 10 million. Q: How well do you think that the international media are covering India? They need to get out of Delhi. Delhi is not India. Delhi is Washington, D.C., which is where the government lives, it’s where special interests live – that’s not India. It’s where you sit when you're doing foreign policy, because that cannot happen anywhere else, but not when you’re covering local politics. The soul of India is elsewhere – in the villages. Many international outlets have been forced to make so many staff cuts, that now one reporter is charged with covering not just India, but Pakistan, Afghanistan, Sri Lanka, Bangladesh, Nepal. It’s physically impossible to accomplish nuanced coverage like this. Q: How much of an editing hand does The Times of India usually have in op-eds, such as the one that Senator John Kerry wrote in advance of the inaugural U.S.-India strategic dialogue in June? If we have to do too much editing, we send the piece back to the writer, or an aide in this case. Because normally, an op-ed by somebody like Kerry is already edited closely, and there's not much we can touch. As a senator, there’s clearly something he wants to accomplish through this, and that’s why he’s writing it. As long as it sticks to our word limit, we don't touch it. Q: President Obama plans to visit India in the fall. What will that be like? It should be a very big deal. Because he will be the first U.S. president in a long, long time who will be visiting India in his first term. Although India is one of the few countries that looked at George Bush as a “friend,” even George Bush visited in his second term. He wasn’t a first-term visitor, and neither was Bill Clinton. I think Obama wants to make a personal statement of his own commitment to the India-U.S. relationship, and we’ve had a little bit of bumpy beginning with this administration. However, President Obama himself is considered a man of very, very compelling charisma in India. There’s a great deal of fascination with him and I’m sure that would play out during the visit. When President Clinton visited, it was extraordinary. I haven’t seen that kind of frenzy in my coverage of state visits. I heard that Obama would like to time his visit so he can bring his family to India as well. Those logistics are going to be hard. Imagine if all of them want to go to the Taj Mahal? That was the problem with President Clinton’s visit. He wanted to ride on an elephant up to the Jaigarh Fort in Jaipur, and his people said, no way, we cannot risk that. And, having the president riding a donkey would be really ridiculous – especially in the Indian context. So, there will not likely be any elephant rides during Obama’s visit. But I do think that half of the foreign policy and media establishment is now very aware of when American schools are on break as they try to match diplomatic calendars with school calendars! Community Groups Unite to Protect Cambodia's Fishery and Forestry Sectors July 22, 2010 at 8:02 AM By Véronique Salze-Lozac’h and Khut Inserey Just months ago, Choeung would never have dreamt of speaking in public. If told that he would speak in front of more than 300 people, including high-ranking officials, several deputy governors from seven provinces, and an under secretary of state, he would have laughed at such a good joke, and his fellow fishermen would have as well. But that was months ago, when Choeung and his colleagues from the community fishery of Stung Kambot in Kampong Thom province gathered for the first time to discuss constraints they faced in their fishing activities and how they could organize themselves to engage with the public sector and find ways to improve their businesses. Community members from Cambodia's fishery and forestry sectors discuss common challenges and threats to natural resources at a cross provincial worshop with more than 300 people. Photo: Nicolas Axelrod/asiamotion.net Early this month – less than nine months later – no one thought of laughing when Choeung took the microphone and stood in front of the large audience assembled in the Kampong Thom Provincial Hall. The occasion was a Cross Provincial Workshop, organized by The Asia Foundation in partnership with Oxfam Great Britain and local NGOs as part of the Foundation’s Civil Society and Pro-Poor Market Program (CSPPM). The program brings rural community groups together to discuss how to navigate obstacles that limit access to certain natural resources that they rely on for their jobs, while emphasizing responsible management of these resources and diversifying livelihood opportunities at the same time. On stage, Choeung explained how his local fishery Community Based Organization (CBO) had worked together with public authorities to implement a fishery law to prohibit fishing groups from using illegal nets to fish in protected areas. Choeung explained that his CBO convened several meetings, first among themselves, then with key public authorities at the commune, district, and finally the provincial level to raise ongoing issues that have prevented them from improving their livelihood. Prior to this workshop, “the members of my CBO did not know exactly where they could go fishing,” says Choeung. “They were helpless when some fishermen violated the fishery law and destroyed their fishing resources. It was very difficult for us to ask for intervention from the public sector when there was an encroachment into our community fisheries territory. We are better informed now. We participate in commune and province-level Public-Private Dialogues that give us great opportunities to talk directly with the public officials and work with them to solve common issues.” Challenges still exist, but a recently-signed agreement, which states clear fishing boundaries for the protected area, as well as authorized fishing equipment that can be used, between Choeung’s officially-registered CBO and the Fishery Administration Cantonment to formalize their cooperation marks a significant step. Now, when boats using environmentally damaging nets enter the protected area, the community fishermen may alert the authorities who have committed to take action against such illegal fishing. The Fishery Inspectorate also gave mobile phones to Choeung and other officially-registered fishery communities so that they can call the Cantonment when they encounter illegal fishing activities. Recently, local community-based organizations united to implement a fishery law to prohibit fishing groups from using illegal nets in protected areas. Photo: Nicolas Axelrod/asiamotion.net At the workshop, H.E. Vann Phany, chief inspector of the Fishery Administration, emphasized key elements in solving the conflict between the community fisheries and some commercial fishing groups. “My strategy in mediating the conflict between the communities and some commercial fishing groups was to talk to all parties and look for compromises on both sides,” he says. This dialogue and mediation proved to be quite successful. As part of the program’s activities, several other CBOs became officially registered and similar agreements were signed. As a result, many fishing communities noted during the workshop that according to their estimates, illegal fishing violations have been reduced by more than 50 percent in the last few weeks. Mon, from a forestry CBO in Kampong Thom that has recently been registered with the Forestry Cantonment, shared a similar experience of the benefits of being officially recognized. “Having our forestry community legally recognized by the Forestry Administration is like a citizen having an identity card. We feel we can better enjoy our rights and protect our trees. We can ask for intervention from public officials when there is illegal cutting in our community area. We can save our resources for future generations.” A CBO member from the audience reacted to this declaration by asking “We have been trying to register for many months now, but we have not been successful. How did you do it?” For Choeung, Mon, and the other members of the fishery and forestry communities from the seven provinces represented at the workshop (Kampong Thom, Kratie, Stung Treng, Mondulkiri, Preah Vihear, Kampong Cham, and Pursat), this marked the first time they had the opportunity to discuss their business issues with people from neighboring provinces. It was also the first time they had a chance to talk with high-level officials from the provincial and national levels. According to these community members, never before had they felt that the public sector was interested in their experience and willing to listen seriously to them. Véronique Salze-Lozac’h is The Asia Foundation’s Regional Director for Economic Programs in Cambodia and Khut Inserey is the Foundation’s Senior Program Officer there. They can be reached at VSalze-Lozach@asiafound.org and ikhut@asiafound.org, respectively. Keeping Bangladesh Competitive in the Garment and Textiles Industry July 22, 2010 at 8:01 AM In late 2008, in the midst of the financial and economic crisis, factory owners in Bangladesh showed remarkable confidence in the future of their industry in Bangladesh. Government officials were also confident of the capacity of the private sector to adapt and remain competitive while workers themselves were confident of their capacity to deliver quality products at a competitive price. But, although Bangladesh has done well in the garment and textiles sector, if the country wants to expand even more and remain competitive, finds the first paper in The Asia Foundation’s new “Occasional Paper” series, it will need to make investments in human capital and technology, rather than just reduce input costs. Research for this paper included extensive interviews with factory workers and government officials, and seven focus-group discussions with 33 factory workers. The paper offers policy recommendations to improve efficiency at the factory level, including providing improved benefits to workers and developing coalitions between the private sector and local and international NGOs, as well as factories, to establish industry standards. It also suggests reforms of the business environment that could provide an overall boost, not only to the garment industry, but to the economy as a whole. Download the paper. [VIDEO] Religious Leaders Engage in Dialogue for New Beginning July 22, 2010 at 8:00 AM In March, USAID and The Asia Foundation co-hosted a regional conference on “The Role of Religious and Community Leaders in Advancing Development in Asia.” The conference provided a forum where over 70 religious and community leaders from 14 countries could share their views and experiences from their respective countries. “We have people from so many different religious backgrounds and so many different countries talking together in partnership with the U.S. government about religion and development,” explains Ari Alexander, deputy director of the Center for Faith-Based & Community Initiatives, in this new video in which participants share their perspectives. “For the first time in my life,” says Buddhist Maha Vihara Committee Member N.B. Dayananda, “I have come upon a scene where I have a fresh hope.” [VIDEO] Community Policing Building Bridges Between Police and Local Communities July 22, 2010 at 7:59 AM Through the 18-month, USAID-funded pilot project Conflict Mitigation through Community-Oriented Policing (CMCOP), The Asia Foundation is playing a significant role in supporting both the police and Timorese communities to develop a new partnership, enhancing police legitimacy and responsiveness to community needs. CMCOP aims to improve the performance of police and build public trust by fostering collaborative community-police partnerships that use a problem-solving approach to respond to the security needs and expectations of the community. “For 24 years, until 1999, the police in Timor-Leste were under the command of the Indonesian military,” explains Asia Foundation Country Representative in Timor-Leste, Silas Everett, in this new video about the CMCOP program. “Today, people still hold memories of the fears they felt toward the police and the security forces at that time.” This email was sent to indepth_indo.nesia@blogger.com. Account Login Don't want to receive this feed any longer? Unsubscribe here This email was carefully delivered by Feed My Inbox. 230 Franklin Road Suite 814 Franklin, TN 37064

Menguatkan Fungsi Pengawasan Pilkada

Oleh: Veri Junaidi Peneliti Hukum Konsorsium Reformasi Hukum Nasional, Jurnal Nasional (15/02/2010)

Revisi Undang-Undang Nomor 22/2007 tentang Penyelenggara Pemilu menjadi salah satu prioritas program legislasi nasional tahun 2010. Sebagai tindak lanjut, Komisi II DPR RI tengah menyusun draft revisi untuk melengkapi kelemahan UU Penyelenggara yang masih berlaku. Salah satu agenda penting adalah penguatan fungsi pengawasan pemilu dan pilkada, mengingat desain pengawasan tidak mampu mendukung terciptanya independensi lembaga pengawas, sejak proses rekruitmen pengawas pemilu. Mekanisme rekruitmen pengawas dalam UU 22/2007 tidak efektif untuk menciptakan alat kontrol panwas pemilu terhadap kinerja Komisi Pemilihan Umum (KPU). Panwaslu yang seharusnya independen, justru dipilih oleh KPU yang merupakan lembaga obyek pengawasan itu sendiri. Mekanisme inilah yang kemudian didobrak Bawaslu dengan melantik 326 anggota panwas pemilu legislatif dan presiden 2009, sebagai panwas pilkada 2010. Langkah ini diambil untuk menetralkan panwas dari pengaruh KPU. Namun kemudian langkah itu justru memunculkan konflik kewenangan yang berdampak munculnya panwas ganda di beberapa daerah, seperti Kalimantan Barat, Kalimantan Selatan, Jember, Kota Surabaya, Kabupaten Lamongan dan Kabupaten Ponorogo. Preseden Polemik panwas ganda muncul ketika Bawaslu mengeluarkan Peraturan 15/2009 tentang Perubahan atas Peraturan 11/2008 tentang Tata Cara Pemilihan dan Penetapan Pengawas Pemilu. Peraturan inilah yang kemudian menjadi landasan hukum bagi Bawaslu dalam menetapkan Panwas Pilkada 2010. Namun dilihat dari ketentuan UU Penyelenggara Pemilu, mekanisme itu jelas dan tegas telah menyimpang. Peraturan itu telah mengabaikan sifat ad hoc (sementara) keanggotaan panwaslu. Dengan sifat itu, seharusnya keanggotaan panwaslu berakhir setelah pemilu usai, dan jikalau diperlukan dapat dilakukan rekruitmen ulang sebagaimana diatur dalam undang-undang. UU Penyelenggara Pemilu secara tegas memerintahkan kepada KPU (berdasarkan tingkatannya) untuk melakukanfit and proper test kepada calon pengawas, sehingga diperoleh enam orang kandidat. Hasil seleksi itu kemudian menjadi hak bagi Bawaslu (berdasarkan tingkatannya) untuk memilih tiga orang di antaranya sebagai panwas terpilih. Dengan demikian, proses rekruitmen Panwas merupakan mekanisme bersama antara KPU dan Bawaslu. Namun, pelanggaran oleh Bawaslu di atas justru terselamatkan dengan kehadiran Surat Edaran Bersama (SEB) KPU dan Bawaslu Nomor 1669/KPU/XII/2009. Surat edaran itu menyebutkan bahwa daerah yang masa jabatan kepala daerahnya berakhir Agustus 2010, tetapi belum melakukan seleksi terhadap calon anggota Panwas Pilkada hingga 9 Desember, Panwas Pilkada diambil dari Panwas Pemilu Legislatif dan Pemilu Presiden. Artinya, langkah Bawaslu dengan melantik Panwas 2009 sebagai panwas pilkada 2010 menjadi terobosan hukum yang tepat untuk mengisi kekosongan jabatan Panwas Pilkada. Langkah itu dianggap sebagai bentuk proses seleksi yang dilakukan secara bersama antara Bawaslu dengan KPU, sebagaimana dikehendaki UU 22/2007. Pengangkatan oleh Bawaslu tetap legal, sepanjang terjadi kekosongan proses seleksi akibat belum dilakukannya fit and proper test oleh KPU. Karena itu, perbedaan penafsiran terhadap SEB KPU dan Bawaslu yang berdampak pada dualisme Panwas Pilkada, harus disikapi dengan bijaksana. Bawaslu harus berbesar hati untuk memprioritaskan hasil pilihan KPU. Arogansi Bawaslu untuk memaksakan hasil pilihannya, justru akan menyeretnya kembali pada pelanggaran terhadap perintah undang-undang, seperti saat mengeluarkan Peraturan 15/2009. Reformasi Pengawasan Terobosan hukum yang sudah dilakukan Bawaslu sudah cukup berhasil, sebagai upaya menjaga kekosongan pengawasan pilkada. Patutlah apresiasi diberikan tanpa harus mendorongnya pada jalan sesat melawan undang-undang, dengan memaksakan diri mengangkat Panwas Pemilu 2009. Karena terobosan hukum itu telah memberikan pesan bagi KPU untuk lebih serius mempersiapkan panwas pilkada. Bagi Bawaslu, pilihan pada prioritas hasil seleksi KPU memang tidak menguntungkan, dan cenderung menyulitkan proses pengawasan. Begitu juga dengan mekanisme rekruitmen panwas sebagaimana diatur UU Penyelenggara Pemilu. KPU sebagai salah satu obyek pengawasan justru memegang kunci bagi proses rekrutmen panwas. Padahal kewenangan itu justru berpotensi menjadi alat transaksi untuk mengamankan posisi penyelenggara. Terdapat beberapa kelemahan jika tetap menggunakan mekanisme rekruitmen sebagaimana diatur Pasal 93 dan Pasal 94 ayat 1 UU 22/2007. Secara logis, KPU akan memilih calon yang dapat "mengamankan" dirinya dari jerat pengawasan yang ketat. Calon seperti ini dapat diperoleh melalui dua kemungkinan, yaitu melalui jalur negosiasi dengan melahirkan kesepakatan yang saling menguntungkan atau justru menghilangkan calon yang berkualitas, kritis dan berani. Karena itu, tidak heran jika pengawasan terhadap penyelenggara sering terlihat tidak berjalan efektif. Akan tetapi tidak dapat dipungkiri, masih banyak panwas yang dalam perjalanan tugasnya justru menunjukkan kualitas yang baik. Namun mereka tidak terbentuk sebagai dampak mekanisme rekruitmen yang direncanakan secara matang. Sangat disayangkan, draft I revisi UU 22/2007 tertanggal 19 Januari 2010 tidak mengagendakan perubahan mekanisme rekruitmen panwaslu. Sebaiknya draft I segera diperbaiki dengan mengagendakan revisi terhadap ketentuan Pasal 93 dan Pasal 94 ayat (1) UU 22/2007. Perlu dipertimbangkan mekanisme rekruitmen yang dapat memberi ruang bagi independensi panwas pemilu. Ruang itu akan terwujud jika Bawaslu diberikan kewenangan penuh untuk membentuk dan menentukan pengawas pemilu. Rekruitmen tidak lagi dilakukan KPU, tetapi oleh kelembagaan pengawas. Pilihan lain adalah menggantikan posisi KPU dengan panitia seleksi yang bersifat independen untuk mengusulkan beberapa calon yang selanjutnya dipilih oleh Bawaslu. Catatan penting adalah bagaimana revisi dapat menciptakan mekanisme rekruitmen yang mampu melahirkan pengawas yang progesif dan berani, untuk menjaga integritas pemilu. Mekanisme itu hendaknya melahirkan rivalitas positif antar dua rezim penyelenggara, yaitu pengawas pemilu dan KPU.

Pilkada Damai; Ujian Kedewasaan Parpol dan Ketegasan KPUD

Proses pemililah kepala daerah dan wakil kepala daerah di Indonesia awalnya dipilih oleh Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat Daerah (DPRD) dan disyahkan oleh Presiden. Saat itu ditengarai pemilhan kepala daerah dan wakilnya hanyalah sebuah formalitas. Karena dalam prakteknya lebih banyak campur tangan pihak pemerintah pusat untuk menentukan siapa-siapa yang duduk menjabat posisi teratas di pemerintahan daerah.

Namun setelah tumbangnya rezim Orde Baru terjadilah perubahan sistem Pilkda. Dasar hukum penyelenggaraan Pilkada selanjutnya adalah Undang-Undang Nomor 32 Tahun 2004 tentang Pemerintahan Daerah. Pilkada diselenggarakan oleh Komisi Pemilihan Umum (KPU) Provinsi dan KPU Kabupaten/Kota dengan diawasi oleh Panitia Pengawas Pemilihan Umum (Panwaslu) Provinsi dan Panwaslu Kabupaten/Kota. Namun perubahan tersebut tidak sekadar merubah wacana perpolitikan di Indonesia, namun juga menimbulkan side efek yang lain yakni Pilkada identik dengan kekisruhan, bentorakan, dan perseteruan berkepanjangan. Kekisruhan pilkada yang digelar di berbagai daerah di Indonesia sejak tahun 2005, kemudian menyisakan gambaran carut-marutnya penyelenggarakan pesta demokrasi lokal itu. Nyaris tak ada satu daerah pun yang sepi konflik.Hampir bisa dipastikan, dari 2 diantara 3 pilkada yang digelar, diakhiri dengan perseteruan dan konflik antara peserta pemilu maupun dengan KPUD.

Ketidak Dewasaan Parpol

Keruwetan sebetulnya sudah dimulai sejak pencalonan kandidat yang dinilai cacat hukum atau dugaan penggunaan ijazah palsu, politik uang (money politic), black campaign pada lawan hingga perolehan dan penghitungan suara yang berbeda antara kandidat dan penyelenggara pilkada. Kondisi tersebut dipastikan karena ketidak dewasaan parpol maupun peserta pemilu independen lainnya. Tentu saja sorotan terbesar harus ditujukan pada Parpol yang seyogyanya mampu berperan sebagai pemain utama demokrasi yang sehat. Apabila parpol tidak memperhatikan regulasi dan aturan main dalam

proses rekruitmen kadernya, bisa dipastikan kita akan terus kesulitan mendapatkan kader parpol yang berkualitas sekaligus yang paham aturan main dengan cara bijaksana.
Saat ini mau tidak mau kita dihadapkan pada situasi dimana kader partai lebih banyak direkrut semata-mata karena mereka memiliki basis masa, maupun mempunyai uang. Profil sikap, mental, dan visi-misi yang bersangkutan jadi persoalan yang kesekian, tidak menjadi prioritas utama. Maka peristiwa ijazah palsu, money politik dan sederet kecurangan lainnya akan mudah terjadi.

Kondisi terbaru yang bisa kita lihat adalah pada kasus Pilkada Surabaya, 2 Juni 2010 lalu. Saat itu penduduk Surabaya yang memiliki hak pilih sebanyak 2.142.899 jiwa, dan diperkirakan 50% golput, memenangkan pasangan Tri Rismaharini-Bambang D.H – “RIDHO”(didukung PDIP), dan perolehan kedua ditempati Arif Afandi dan Adies Kadir “CACAK”(didukung partai Demokrat). Seperti yang kita ketahui bersama, kemenangan tipis RIDHO (selisih kurang dari 10%) kemudian digugat oleh CACAK yang merasa sudah didukung oleh partai besar. Asumsi dukungan partai besar akan pasti memenangkan Pilkada menjadi sulit dipertanggungjawabkan karena pada dasarnya masyarakat sendiri yang tidak bergabung pada partai -massa mengambang – sangat besar kemungkinan memilih calon sesuai apa yang mereka harapkan. Penulis yang secara langsung melakukan survey sederhana di Surabaya menemukan, bahwa 9 dari 10 pemilih memang memilih RIDHO.

Kemudian pihak CACAK pun melakukan gugatan sampai tahap Mahkamah Konstitusi, dengan berbagai alasan, termasuk soal ketidak tahuan perangkat pelaksana pemilu di TPS yang dianggap tidak paham sistem pemilu kali itu, yaitu masih diakuinya sistem coblos (yang berbeda dengan pemilu nasional yang sudah contreng).

Ketidak Tegasan KPUD

Faktor lainnya tentu saja adalah sikap ketegasan KPUD, kondisi KPUD pun tidak jauh dari KPU Pusat, dimana untuk saat ini terlihat bahwa keberadaan para pemangku tugas di KPUD lebih karena mereka mampu memenuhi standard administrasi yang dibutuhkan, dan kurang memperhitungkan kemampuan mereka pada bidang Pemilu. Maka yang terjadi banyak kasus di KPUD yang kemudian tidak bisa mereka putuskan secara tegas, malah kemudian diajukan ke KPU Pusat dan juga melalui jalur hukum yakni lewat Mahkamah Agung mapun Mahkamah Konstitusi.

Sikap kurang peka terhadap penggunaan anggaran tampaknya menjadi pokok persoalan utama. Ambil contoh masih di pilkada Walikota di Surabaya yang berbudget sekitar Rp 65 milyar ( digunakan Rp 37,8 Milyar untuk pelaksanaan, dan sisanya untuk cadangan bila ada putaran kedua), maka seolah bagi mereka tiidak akan ada masalah bila pilkada tersebut dilanjutkan dengan kondisi semacam penghitungan ulang maupun pilkada ulang. Terbukti dengan sangat bersemangatnya KPUD Surabaya untuk melakukan konsultasi budget untuk pelaksanaan pemilu ulang dan penghitungan ulang hasil pemilu dan ke KPU Pusat. Tanpa memerhatikan persoalan riil di lapangan, misalnya kotak-kotak suara tadi tidak dikunci dan tersimpan pada tempatnya, bahkan Panitia Pengawas Surabaya menemukan banyak kasus dimana kotak-kota tersebut tergeletak sembarangan, dekat tempat orang sehari-hari bekerja.

Mahkamah Konstitusi 30 Juni lalu, memutuskan coblos ulang di 7 dari 31 kecamatan di Surabaya yaitu Bulak, Semampir, Krembangan, Rungkut, Sukolilo, Putat Jaya dan Wiyung, akan dilaksanakan pada 1 Agustus 2010. Sedangkan sisanya harus melakukan penghitungan ulang. Sebuah proses yang sangat mahal dan belum tentu efisien apalagi efektif. Kenapa tidak efektif? Karena dalam pelaksanaan penghitungan ulang misalnya seperti yang dilakukan dikisruh pilkada Bupati Lamongan beberapa waktu lalu, maka proses penghitungan ulang pada 27 kecamatan, 447 kelurahan/desa serta 2.557 TPS, maka masing-masing petugasnya hanya diwakili 3 orang dimasing-masing KPPS dengan 2 sampai 3 saksi. Jumlah yang sangat minim dan memungkinkan terjadinya “main mata” di antara pihak-pihak tersebut, namun dengan anggaran yang sangat besar (sekitar Rp 2 milyar) yang notabene jelas tidak efesien.

Gambaran situasi di atas memang menjadi sangat memprihatinkan, karena terlihat adanya kegagalan pendidikan politik di negeri ini. Terlebih ketika kemudian muncul wacana baru, apakah pilkada sebaiknya ditiadakan? Kembali pada sistem penetapan pimpinan daerah seperti di jaman Orde Baru?. Tentu ini akan menjadi sebuah kemunduran, terlebih sesungguhnya masyarakat Indonesia sendiri mulai memiliki kesadaran untuk memilih pemimpin daerah mereka yang benar-benar mampu melakukan perbaikan dalam bidang birokrasi dan ekonomi, serta meningkatkan kesejahteraan mereka.

Oleh Lestari Nurhajati

Materi ini disajikan dalam diskusi "Bisakah Pilkada damai?" , Jakarta, Kamis, 22 Juli 2010.