Commission II and DPR Legislation Body Compete to Discuss Election Bill, What Really Happened?

Tensions have emerged within the DPR after Commission II and the Legislative Body both claimed authority to discuss the revision of the Law amending Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections. Feeling that its authority has been bypassed, Commission II of the DPR sent a letter to the leadership of the DPR to request clarification and affirmation regarding which council's supporting apparatus is entitled to handle the strategic bill.

The revision of the Election Law amendment (Election Bill) is included in the list of the National Legislative Program (Prolegnas) priorities for 2025. However, until now, its discussion has been stalled due to ongoing tug-of-war between two parliamentary bodies in the DPR, namely Commission II and the Legislative Body (Baleg). Both Commission II and Baleg feel equally entitled to discuss the Election Bill.

Chairman of Commission II of the DPR, Rifqinizamy Karsayuda, when met after a meeting at the Parliament Complex in Jakarta on Tuesday (22/4/2025), revealed that his party has sent a letter to the leadership of the DPR to request certainty regarding which council's supporting equipment (AKD) will be assigned to discuss the Election Bill. Whatever the decision of the DPR leadership, the commission that partners with the election organizers will follow it.

"I have made a letter, I have made a statement to the DPR leadership, fully following the direction and decision of the DPR leadership. Commission II fully follows the decision and direction of the DPR leadership," said Rifqinizamy.

He admitted that he has not yet received a response from the leadership of the DPR regarding the matter. However, he believes that the leadership of the DPR has a better understanding of which AKD is appropriate to discuss the Election Bill.

"Where and when, we leave it entirely up to the DPR leadership. The DPR leadership certainly has a better helicopter view than us in Commission II of the DPR," said the Nasdem politician.

Regardless of that, Rifqinizamy explained that, based on the history of legislative formation, the revision of the Election Law and the Political Party Law has indeed been discussed in Commission II of the DPR. This is because Commission II has the authority in the electoral field and collaborates with the election organizers.

However, he stated that the revision of the Election Law had also been discussed by the special committee. "Therefore, I believe we fully leave it to the leadership," he asserted.

According to Kompas, in 2010-2011, the draft of the Election Bill was prepared by the Legislative Body. During discussions with the government, the DPR established a special committee (pansus) across commissions. Similarly, when the Election Law was revised again in 2015-2016, the DPR formed a special committee to conduct discussions with the government.

Meanwhile, DPR Baleg member Firman Soebagyo, revealed that there was a tug of war between Baleg and Commission II regarding the discussion of the Election Bill because until now there has been no official decision on who will be the leading sector in the discussion of the draft regulation.

The Legislative Body wishes to discuss this Bill because it has the idea to compile or collaborate all election laws, regional head elections, and others into one.

However, Firman believes that it does not matter who discusses it, whether it is Commission II or the Legislative Body, as long as the substance of the revision is clear and can improve the electoral system.

The Golkar Party politician also emphasized the importance of political communication between factions and commissions to avoid conflicts of authority. "My hope is that later there will be communication, political communication," he said.

Firman said that the reason Baleg wanted to discuss the Election Bill was because they wanted to propose that the Election Law be revised through an “omnibus law” approach. This means that the Election Bill will be combined with various other political regulations such as the Regional Election Law and the Political Party Law.

"That is why the Legislative Body wants to discuss this bill, as it has the idea to compile or collaborate all election laws, regional head elections, and others into one," he explained.

The current Election Law, namely Law Number 7 of 2017, is a combination or codification of three laws. These three laws are Law Number 42 of 2008 concerning the Election of the President and Vice President, Law Number 8 of 2012 concerning the Election of the DPR, DPD, and DPRD, as well as Law Number 15 of 2011 concerning Election Organizers.

Firman also mentioned the performance of the General Election Commission (KPU), which is considered no longer independent as expected. Therefore, several political parties have raised the discourse of incorporating party elements into the oversight structure of the KPU. This provision is proposed to be regulated in the omnibus law on Political Affairs in the future.

"Not as a KPU commissioner, but as a supervisor. So that political parties also have authority, have control within. The game, right, is inside. But, if you watch it, they at least don't hesitate to do strange things. If you look at the KPU commissioners now, right, they are free (to do anything)," said Firman.

Regarding the discourse on the involvement of political parties in the structure of KPU oversight, Firman stated that it has not yet become an official party decision, but many members from various parties have voiced similar sentiments. "I strongly agree. Because we feel aggrieved," he said.

Furthermore, Firman urged that the initiative to revise the Election Law should come from the DPR, not from the government. "The government is not a participant in the election. Those who understand the gaps and shortcomings are the political parties that have participated in the elections," he emphasized.