Kegiatan Kerja sama IRE dalam Isu Pendalaman Demokrasi

32 IR E A NNU A L R EPO R T 2014 D in a m ik a P ro g ra m d a n K eg ia ta n K el em ba g a a n Sepanjang tahapan pemilu berlangsung, perbincangan ma- syarakat tentang Pemilu 2014 ternyata lebih seru dari pemi- lu-pemilu sebelumnya. Cerita paling banyak adalah tentang politik uang. Obrolan di pos ronda, warung angkringan, kan- tor, hingga diskusi yang digelar para aktivis menyodorkan fakta adanya praktik money politic yang demikian mempri- hatinkan. Memprihatinkan karena para calon anggota legis- latif melakukannya secara terbuka tanpa ada rasa malu se- dikit pun. Memprihatinkan karena para calon pemilih men- ganggap hal tersebut sebagai suatu kewajaran dalam hajatan pesta demokrasi. Tudingan atas hadirnya problem tersebut dialamatkan pada perubahan sistem pemilu dari proporsional tertutup men- jadi proporsional terbuka paska putusan MK pada tahun 2009 lalu. Pada sistem proporsional tertutup partai sebagai kontestan memiliki kendali penuh terhadap kandidat yang diusung dengan penetapan nomor urut kandidat. Sedang- kan sistem proporsional terbuka cenderung mengarah pada politik elektoral yang bertumpu pada kandidat dan personal vote. Dibanding proporsional tertutup, proporsional terbuka memberikan insentif lebih kepada calon dalam melakukan politik uang. Namun benarkah kegagalan transformasi reformasi sistem representasi berakar dari perubahan sistem pemilu yang lebih terbuka dan kompetitif? Apakah prasayarat-prasyarat bagi hadirnya kompetisi yang adil dan jujur telah dipenuhi? Tidakkah partai seharusnya juga berbenah dalam sistem semacam itu? Rangkaian Kegiatan Pada tahun 2014, kerjasama dengan CENTER for LEAD ter- kait pemilu fokus pada penelitian, penulisan hasil penelitian, dan diseminasi hasil penelitian ke dalam buku. Penelitian dan elaborasi lebih lanjut tentang kaitan antara money poli- 33 IR E AN N U AL R E P O R T 2 1 4 T h e D yn a m ic s o f T h e P ro g ra m a n d T h e A ct ivit ie s o f T h e In st it u tio n fact to investigate more deeply. However, the assumption was wrong. Throughout the stages of the election, the public debate about the 2014 election, in fact, was hotter than the previous elec- tions. Most of the stories were about money politics. Chatting in the community guard posts, angkringan small traditional food stall in Yogyakarta , offices, and even discussions held by activists showed the practices of money politics were at alarming rate. It was said so because the legislative candi- dates did money politics openly without any shame, and they thought that it was normal in the celebration of democracy. The allegation of these problems was addressed to the changes in the electoral system from closed list proportional system to open list proportional system after the decision of the Constitutional Court in 2009. In the closed list propor- tional system, the party as the contestant has full control over the candidates promoted by setting the number of the candidates in the list. On the other hand, open list propor- tional system tends to lead to electoral politics, which is based on the candidates and personal vote. In comparison with the closed list proportional system, the open list pro- portional system gives more incentives to the candidates in doing money politics. However, is it true that the failure in the transformation of reformation of representation system was caused by the change in the system of the election which was more open and competitive? Had the prerequisites of the fair and hon- est competition been fulfilled? The parties should also reor- ganize themselves, shouldn’t they? The Series of Activities In 2014, the cooperation with CENTER for LEAD related to the election focused on research, research result writing, and dissemination of research results into a book. Research