Profesionalisme Birokrasi dan Integritas Pemilu: Analisis Kapasitas AMO Birokrasi Komisi Pemilihan Umum Republik Indonesia
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.58344/locus.v5i5.5815Keywords:
kapasitas birokrasi, amo framework, integritas pemilu, komisi pemilihan umum, rekrutmen berbasis meritAbstract
Keberhasilan pemilu dalam demokrasi kontemporer tidak hanya ditentukan oleh desain formal lembaga penyelenggara, tetapi juga oleh kapasitas internal birokrasi yang menopangnya. Penelitian ini menganalisis kapasitas birokrasi Komisi Pemilihan Umum (KPU) Republik Indonesia menggunakan kerangka AMO (Ability, Motivation, Opportunity) untuk mengidentifikasi akar persoalan profesionalisme birokrasi pemilu. Menggunakan pendekatan kualitatif yang memadukan analisis dokumen, data kelembagaan KPU, dan wawancara mendalam dengan tujuh informan kunci mencakup pejabat KPU RI, mantan komisioner, dan pejabat Kementerian PANRB. Temuan menunjukkan bahwa ketiga dimensi AMO birokrasi KPU menghadapi defisit yang signifikan: kemampuan (ability) terhambat oleh sistem rekrutmen yang belum sepenuhnya berbasis kompetensi kepemiluan dan minimnya pelatihan teknis; motivasi (motivation) lemah akibat ketiadaan jalur karier kepemiluan yang jelas dan berkeadilan; serta kesempatan (opportunity) terbatas karena struktur organisasi yang timpang, pola penganggaran yang tergantung siklus pemilu, dan kerentanan terhadap politisasi jabatan strategis. Indonesia hanya mencapai skor PEI 47,16 dan berada di peringkat 110 dari 170 negara, jauh di bawah Korea Selatan (76,5), Kanada (81,2), dan Finlandia (82,9). Suatu kesenjangan yang salah satunya berakar pada defisit kapasitas AMO birokrasi pemilu. Artikel ini merekomendasikan pembangunan sistem karier kepemiluan berbasis merit, standardisasi pelatihan teknis melalui kolaborasi kelembagaan, serta penguatan akuntabilitas rekrutmen berbasis digital.
References
Appelbaum, E. (2000). Manufacturing advantage: Why high-performance work systems pay off. Cornell University Press.
Asplund, E. (2023). Training and professional development in electoral administration (Policy Paper No. 28). International IDEA.
Birch, S. (2011). Electoral malpractice. Oxford University Press.
Catt, H., Ellis, A., Maley, M., Wall, A., & Wolf, P. (2014). Electoral management design: The International IDEA handbook (Edisi revisi). International IDEA.
Creswell, J. W. (2014). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (4th ed.). Sage Publications.
Dahlström, C., & Lapuente, V. (2017). Organizing leviathan: Politicians, bureaucrats, and the making of good government. Cambridge University Press.
Economist Intelligence Unit. (2025). Democracy index 2024. The Economist Group.
Electoral Integrity Project. (2025). What we do. https://www.electoralintegrityproject.com/what-we-do
Gailmard, S. (2014). Accountability and principal–agent theory. Dalam M. Bovens, R. E. Goodin, & T. Schillemans (Ed.), The Oxford handbook of public accountability (hlm. 90–105). Oxford University Press.
Garnett, H. A., James, T. S., & Norris, P. (2025). Perceptions of electoral integrity: Global data and analysis. Harvard Kennedy School, Electoral Integrity Project.
International IDEA. (2021). The global state of democracy 2021: Building resilience in a pandemic era. International IDEA.
James, T. S. (2019a). Better workers, better elections? Electoral management body workforces and electoral integrity worldwide. International Political Science Review, 40(3), 370–390.
James, T. S. (2019b). Comparative electoral management: Performance, networks and instruments. Routledge.
James, T. S., Garnett, H. A., Loeber, L., & van Ham, C. (2019c). Electoral management and the organisational determinants of electoral integrity: Introduction. International Political Science Review, 40(3), 295–312.
Kang, W. (2021). Democratic resilience and electoral integrity in Asia. Palgrave Macmillan.
Karp, J. A., Nai, A., & Norris, P. (2017). The integrity of elections: Electoral management bodies, public confidence, and political participation. Electoral Studies, 45, 1–11.
Komisi Aparatur Sipil Negara. (2023). Laporan penilaian penerapan sistem merit pada instansi pemerintah tahun 2023. KASN.
Komisi Pemilihan Umum Republik Indonesia. (2024). Data hasil Pemilu 2024. KPU RI.
López-Pintor, R. (2000). Electoral management bodies as institutions of governance. United Nations Development Programme.
Lundstedt, M., & Edgell, A. B. (2020). Institutions of electoral integrity and clientelism: The role of electoral management bodies (V-Dem Working Paper No. 108). Varieties of Democracy Institute.
Mozaffar, S., & Schedler, A. (2002). The comparative study of electoral governance: Introduction. International Political Science Review, 23(1), 5–27.
Norris, P. (2014). Why electoral integrity matters. Cambridge University Press.
Norris, P. (2017). Strengthening electoral integrity. Cambridge University Press.
Norris, P., Frank, R. W., & Martínez i Coma, F. (2014). Measuring electoral integrity around the world: A new dataset. Electoral Studies, 34, 350–369.
Perludem. (2023). Kajian kelembagaan penyelenggara pemilu di Indonesia. Perludem.
Peters, B. G., & Pierre, J. (2004). Politicization of the civil service in comparative perspective. Routledge.
Pratikno. (2007). Politik kelembagaan pemilu di Indonesia pasca-Orde Baru. Universitas Gadjah Mada Press.
Surbakti, R., & Nugroho, K. (2015). Memahami pemilu dan demokrasi. Kemitraan.
van Aaken, A. (2017). Independent electoral institutions. Dalam Max Planck encyclopedia of comparative constitutional law. Oxford University Press.
van Ham, C., & Garnett, H. A. (2019). Building impartial electoral management? Institutional design, independence and electoral integrity. International Political Science Review, 40(3), 313–334.
Wall, A., Ellis, A., Maley, M., Catt, H., & Wolf, P. (2016). Electoral management design: The International IDEA handbook (Edisi revisi). International IDEA.
Downloads
Published
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2026 Atik Arfan, Sri Budi Eko Wardani
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC-BY-SA). that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.
