Skip to main content



commentary Commentary

Commentary: The mind-boggling challenge of Indonesia’s election logistics

On top of President Joko Widodo and challenger Prabowo Subianto's headline contest, more than 245,000 candidates will run for more than 20,000 seats across hundreds of islands, says Lowy Institute's Ben Bland.

Commentary: The mind-boggling challenge of Indonesia’s election logistics

An election official prepares ballot boxes before distributing them to polling stations, in Jakarta, Indonesia on Apr 18, 2017. (Photo: REUTERS/Beawiharta)

SYDNEY: How do you organise free and fair elections in a sprawling developing country beset by political corruption, bureaucratic incompetence and organisational inefficiency?

For Indonesia – and its 193 million voters – the answer lies in the vast number of polling stations, the use of a metal nail (not a pen or a machine) for voting, 1.6 million bottles of halal certified ink and the practice of counting votes in public.


On Apr 17, the world’s third most populous democracy will hold simultaneous presidential and legislative elections for the first time. 

It will be world’s biggest direct presidential elections (because the US uses an electoral college) and one of the most complicated single-day elections in global history.

By contrast, India, which is the world’s biggest democracy, is conducting its parliamentary elections through a rolling regional process over six weeks in April and May.

READ: India elections a battle for minds and souls, a commentary

The scale of Indonesia’s electoral process is mind-boggling, with five separate elections at once, for the president, both houses of parliament, provincial legislatures and district/city councils.

Altogether, there are more than 245,000 candidates running for more than 20,000 national and local legislative seats across hundreds of islands, in addition to the headline contest between President Joko Widodo and challenger Prabowo Subianto.

READ:  Old rivals face off in Indonesia ahead of elections, a commentary


Despite the logistical challenges and the government’s poor reputation for coordination, the election commission (KPU) has a surprisingly good track record of delivering fair elections, with the results ultimately accepted by politicians and the public alike.

That is thanks, in part, to the unique way in which it organises elections. The KPU will operate more than 800,000 polling stations, with each one catering to 200-300 voters. Some 6 million temporary election workers will be running the polling stations and many are serving the community in which they live

An election official counts ballots during the counting process after polls closed in the governor election in Jakarta, Indonesia April 19, 2017. (Photo: REUTERS/Beawiharta)

Dispersing voters across so many polling stations makes it hard for anyone to systematically – and convincingly – stuff ballots in national elections.

Another important quirk is the use of metal nails for voting. Rather than mark their choice with a pen or pencil, which can lead to disputes about the validity of votes, Indonesians punch a hole in the ballot paper to select candidates (the Indonesian verb for voting, “coblos”, literally means “to punch”).

To prevent people from trying to vote in two different places, officials dip voters’ fingers in temporarily indelible ink, which is halal certified to ensure it is acceptable to the 90 per cent of Indonesians who are Muslims.

READ: Jokowi's biggest challenge to re-election? A social media campaign against him, a commentary


Soon after polls close on election day at 1pm, election officials will count the votes in public at each polling station, holding up every ballot paper so witnesses can see the sunlight shining through where the nail has been punched.

This open process allows opinion pollsters to carry out “quick counts”, which are based on a statistically significant sample of real votes (unlike exit polls, which are simply another survey). These quick counts have in the past usually proved reliable estimates of the final results, except where unscrupulous actors have deliberately falsified them.

At the last presidential election, in 2014, the KPU also uploaded the results from each polling station to its website, allowing one group of civic minded, tech-savvy young Indonesians to perform their own full count by uploading and collating all the data.

Indonesian men show their inked fingers after casting their ballots during regional elections in Tangerang. (Photo: AFP/ADEK BERRY)

The police and the military, which number over 400,000 personnel each, are banned from voting to ensure their neutrality – a stark contrast from Thailand, which still waits in frustration for the election outcome.

READ: In Thailand, there is only one certainty – the army remains key, a commentary


It is far from a perfect process and there are often legal challenges to the results. Plenty of politicians and others try to nobble voters, despite strict electoral rules and oversight from the law enforcement agencies, civil society and two formal election oversight bodies (in addition to the KPU).

Vote buying, where candidates or their agents hand out cash, cooking oil and rice, is widespread, with up to one third of Indonesians receiving such a bribe, according to one study.

But it is not clear how effective such methods are, particularly for national elections. Secret ballots mean that those handing out cash have no reliable means to check who voters have chosen.

READ: Real politics finally as Indonesia takes to TV for presidential debates, a commentary

The KPU – and its supporters in civil society – are trying hard to ensure that this is one day on which the Indonesian people, not the politicians, will have the last say.

Just ask Munafri Arifuddin, who ran uncontested last year as mayor of Makassar, a thriving city of more than 1 million people in Sulawesi, with the backing of 10 political parties in a blatant establishment stitch-up.

The electorate’s response? They voted by 53 per cent to 47 per cent for none of the above, forcing a re-run of the election in 2020.

Ben Blend is director of the Southeast Asia project at the Lowy Institute. This commentary first appeared on Lowy Institute’s blog The Interpreter.

Source: CNA/sl


Also worth reading