Jakarta – The Election Supervisory Committee (Bawaslu) needs adjudication authority to help resolve disputes in regions, a study reveals.

The joint research study, from Bawaslu and the Center for Electoral Reform (Cetro), shows that electoral watchdog committees need additional authority to prevent abundant violations, both at local and national levels.

Cetro's senior researcher, Refly Harun, said that the study recommends two proposals. First, to grant Bawaslu authority as an adjudicator, especially on cases of administrative violations. Second, to establish an elections court which could handle all election violation cases.

"If Bawaslu had an adjudicatory function, it would be able to follow up any report of a violation in elections quickly," Refly told a joint media presentation last week.

Bawaslu states that it had received 605 election administration violation reports from across 36 regions and one province by June this year.

Of these 605, as many as 463 reports were handed over to the General Elections Commission (KPU). However, only 295 reports were actually processed by the KPU.

Disputes requiring a settlement on election results go to the Constitutional Court (MK).

Refly said that, if Bawaslu were given greater powers, then when it received a violation report, it could conduct its own investigation and question all parties involved right away; thereafter, it could report its investigation's results to a panel, which would be able to impose an appropriate sanction, from giving a warning to disqualifying election candidates.

He added that, so far, if Bawaslu receives a violation report, it has to transfer the case to the police but in practice, this system results in not all cases being processed.

Wirdyaningsih from Bawaslu's division of legal and handling violations, added that the committee's administrative sanction should be final and binding on the parties concerned.

Refly explained, however, that Bawaslu would not involve itself with any criminal facets in a case. In this situation, the case would be handed over to the police, while Bawaslu's authority would be limited to imposing an administrative sanction.

"So, by the time any legal process was under way, the administrative sanction would already have been settled," he added.

Bawaslu's chairman, Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo, argued that if an election court were established, maintaining a sole focus on election issues, the election supervisory committees would have an additional authority in the legal process, including making charges.

Refly said that the election court is envisaged to operate as a low-level court, while for high-profile cases, the legal process could be handled by the Supreme Court (MA).

He added that the election court would need its own procedural law, different to that used by other courts, whether criminal or civil.

Wirdyaningsih, said that with regard to election violations, Bawaslu received 582 reports, 228 of which were handed over to the police, but as many as 115 of them were not processed.

"We want the authority of adjudication to be granted to the supervisory committees, including Bawaslu and the local election monitoring committee (Panwaslu)," Bambang stated.

He added that the study's results will be presented to respective commissions within the House of Representatives. (rpt)