Electronic Theses and Dissertation

Pasal 486 ayat (1) dan ayat (3) Undang-Undang Pemilu menyebutkan bahwa untuk menyamakan pemahaman dan pola penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia maka dibentuk Sentra Penegakan Hukum Terpadu (Gakkumdu) yang terdiri dari Bawaslu, Kepolisian, dan Kejaksaan. Dalam praktiknya, kelembagaan Gakkumdu belum mampu mewujudkan keadilan sebagaimana dijiwai oleh nilai Pancasila sebagai norma dasar negara (staatsfundamentalnorm). Rendahnya rasio penegakan hukum dan terjadi deadlock antar pihak akibat perbedaan pendapat serta banyaknya kasus pidana pemilu yang terhenti di Gakkumdu menunjukkan adanya kesenjangan mendasar antara cita keadilan Pancasila dengan realita penegakan hukum pidana pemilu. Masalah pokok penelitian yaitu apa landasan filosofis penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia diberikan kepada Sentra Gakkumdu, apakah penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia sudah memenuhi nilai keadilan berdasarkan Pancasila dan bagaimana konsepsi penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia yang berlandaskan Pancasila.
Penelitian ini bertujuan untuk menganalisis landasan filosofis kewenangan Gakkumdu dalam penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia, menganalisis penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia ditinjau dari perspektif keadilan Pancasila serta merumuskan konsepsi penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia yang berlandaskan Pancasila.
Penelitian ini merupakan penelitian yuridis normatif yang didukung oleh data empiris. Pendekatan yang digunakan meliputi pendekatan filosofis, pendekatan perundang-undangan, pendekatan konseptual, pendekatan sejarah, pendekatan kasus dan pendekatan perbandingan. Data yang diperoleh melalui studi kepustakaan diperkuat melalui wawancara dengan narasumber dari penyelenggara pemilu, dan praktisi kemudian dianalisis secara kualitatif untuk menjawab ketiga permasalahan penelitian.
Hasil penelitian menunjukkan bahwa, Pertama, landasan filosofis terhadap kewenangan Gakkumdu dalam penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia merupakan cerminan dari nilai permusyawaratan sila keempat Pancasila, namun praktiknya landasan tersebut hanya bersifat potensial dan belum teraktualisasi secara substantif karena tidak ada mekanisme arbitrase ketika deadlock terjadi antara ketiga unsur dalam Gakkumdu sehingga forum musyawarah berubah menjadi negosiasi kepentingan. Kedua, penanganan tindak pidana pemilu di Indonesia oleh Sentra Gakkumdu belum berkeadilan berdasarkan nilai-nilai Pancasila dikarenakan kualifikasi anggota Gakkumdu yang lebih menekankan kompetensi teknis daripada integritas moral religius, tidak adanya perlindungan hukum bagi saksi dan pelapor, jangka waktu penanganan yang terlalu singkat, persepsi memilih perkara dan politisasi perkara, deadlock yang terjadi antar pihak dalam Gakkumdu, sanksi denda yang tidak proporsional dengan kerusakan demokratis yang ditimbulkan. Ketiga, Konsepsi penanganan tindak pidana pemilu berdasarkan Pancasila dapat diwujudkan dalam dua konsepsi yaitu konsepsi integrasi penanganan tindak pidana pemilu pada Bawaslu dan konsepi pembentukan Peradilan Khusus Pemilu Indonesia (PKPI) sebagai lembaga peradilan independen dalam satu yurisdiksi hukum pemilu
Disarankan kepada pemerintah dan Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat untuk melakukan rekonstruksi kelembagaan melalui dua konsepsi yang saling melengkapi secara bertahap, yaitu integrasi penanganan tindak pidana pemilu pada Bawaslu atau pembentukan lembaga peradilan khusus pemilu yang bebas dan mandiri serta mengintegrasikan seluruh jenis dan tingkatan pelanggaran dan sengketa pemilu.

Article 486 paragraphs (1) and (3) of the Election Law provides that, in order to harmonize the understanding and pattern of handling electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia, an Integrated Law Enforcement Center (Sentra Gakkumdu) was established, comprising the General Elections Supervisory Body (Bawaslu), the Indonesian National Police, and the Attorney General's Office. In practice, the institutional framework of Gakkumdu has thus far failed to give effect to justice as imbued by the values of Pancasila as the fundamental norm of the state (staatsfundamentalnorm). The persistently low law enforcement ratio, recurring institutional deadlock arising from divergence of opinion among its constituent elements, and the considerable number of electoral criminal cases that have stalled within Gakkumdu collectively demonstrate a fundamental gap between the ideal of Pancasila justice and the reality of electoral criminal law enforcement in Indonesia. The principal research problems addressed herein are: what constitutes the philosophical foundation (landasan filosofis) upon which the authority to handle electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia has been conferred upon Sentra Gakkumdu; whether the handling of electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia has fulfilled the value of justice as grounded in Pancasila; and what constitutes the ideal conception of handling electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia in accordance with the principles of Pancasila. This research aims to analyze the philosophical foundation underpinning the authority of Gakkumdu in the handling of electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia, to examine the handling of electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia from the perspective of Pancasila justice, and to formulate an ideal conception of handling electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia grounded in Pancasila. This research employs a normative juridical methodology (yuridis normatif) supported by empirical data. The approaches utilized encompass the philosophical approach, the statutory approach (pendekatan perundang-undangan), the conceptual approach, the historical approach, and the comparative approach. Data obtained through library research were further corroborated by semi structured interviews with informants drawn from electoral administration bodies, academia, and legal practitioners, and were thereafter analyzed qualitatively to address the three research problems. The findings of this research are as follows. First, the philosophical foundation of the authority conferred upon Gakkumdu for the handling of electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia constitutes a reflection of the deliberative values (nilai permusyawaratan) enshrined in the Fourth Precept (Sila Keempat) of Pancasila; however, in practice, such foundation remains merely potential in character and has not been substantively actualized, owing to the absence of an arbitration mechanism when deadlock arises among the three constituent elements of Gakkumdu, thereby causing the deliberative forum to degenerate into a negotiation of institutional interests. Second, the handling of electoral criminal offenses in Indonesia through Sentra Gakkumdu has not been conducted in a manner consistent with justice as prescribed by the values of Pancasila, by reason of the following deficiencies: the qualification criteria for Gakkumdu members placing greater emphasis on technical competence than on moral and religious integrity; the absence of adequate legal protection for witnesses and complainants; an unduly abbreviated timeframe for case processing; the phenomenon of selective case prosecution and case politicization; recurring deadlock among the parties within Gakkumdu; and the imposition of financial penalties disproportionate to the democratic harm occasioned by the electoral criminal offenses in question. Third, the ideal conception of handling electoral criminal offenses in accordance with Pancasila may be realized through two complementary conceptions: the first being the full integration of electoral criminal law enforcement within Bawaslu; and the second being the establishment of a Special Electoral Court of Indonesia (Peradilan Khusus Pemilu Indonesia / PKPI) It is recommended that the legislature undertake an institutional reconstruction through two mutually complementary conceptions to be implemented in a gradual and phased manner: namely, the full integration of the handling of electoral criminal offenses within Bawaslu; or, alternatively, the establishment of a free, independent, and specialized electoral court that consolidates all categories and levels of electoral.