This policy paper describes a mixed electoral system of alternative choices to improve Indonesia’s future elections. Alternative choices of electoral system design must be based on evaluation and objective conditions to answer the problems and failures of the electoral system in achieving its goals or systemic failure. This is intended to minimize the presence of electoral profit motives from changes in system design. The open proportional electoral system that Indonesia implemented in four elections (2009, 2014, 2019 and 2024) left many problems such as voter confusion that led to a high number of invalid ballots. In addition, open proportionality combined with multi-member districts and simultaneous elections for five ballots (president, DPR, DPD, Provincial DPRD, and Regency / City DPRD), failed to achieve the goal of the Constitutional Court’s decision to bring efficiency to election governance. Failure also occurs in achieving the effectiveness of the presidential system of government as measured by the presence of simple multiparties from simultaneous elections cannot be achieved. A mixed electoral system is an electoral system that combines two variants of electoral systems, namely a closed proportional electoral system and a majority plurality electoral system with a variant of first past to post (FPTP), which can be used as an alternative to improve Indonesia’s electoral system in the future. This system divides electoral districts according to the characteristics of the two electoral systems, namely multi-member districts for closed proportional electoral systems and single member districts for FPTP electoral systems. Mixed electoral systems attempt to combine the advantages of proportional and FPTP electoral systems, one of which is to make it easier for voters to make their choices. This is because the ballot paper contains the logo and name of the party for closed proportionality and the name of one legislative candidate for FPTP electoral systems. Voters are given the space to choose either a party or a candidate. On the other hand, the mixed electoral system in the mixed member proportional (MMP) variant is able to maintain the balance or proportionality of the election results with the acquisition of party seats because the two variants of the electoral system are interconnected and seat compensation is possible. The MMP mixed electoral system can bring efficiency to voters and election organizers in carrying out election governance. In addition, this policy paper also recommends that the allocation of seats for the two electoral systems be carried out in a 50:50 balance with the electoral districts for the closed proportional electoral system at the provincial level for the DPR while for the FPTP variant the Regency / City or a combination of Regency / City or part of the Regency / City to maintain the degree of representation. On the other hand, to maintain the proportionality of the election results, the amount of the parliamentary threshold is determined by an effective threshold and for parties that do not exceed the threshold can still obtain seats provided that they obtain at least one seat in one electoral district. Meanwhile, to increase the number of women’s representation, a quota of 30% of women in the list of candidates in a closed proportional electoral system is applied and in 30% of FPTP electoral districts there is one female legislative candidate.
Read more in the attachment below…..
