During election campaigns, the incumbent president may participate in campaigns for the presidential candidate who will replace him. In Indonesia, this is regulated in Law Number 7 of 2017 concerning Elections (“Election Law”).

However, if the president participates in the election campaign, there is a potential for the president's attitude to be biased. This can benefit certain presidential candidates. Several election histories have proven this.

In Uruguay, presidential candidate Jose Mujica managed to win the 2009 Uruguayan election with a total vote of 52.4% in the second round after being supported by incumbent president Tabare Vazquez. In the 2016 US election, President Barack Obama's support enabled presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to win a total of 48.2% of the popular vote compared to her opponent, Donald Trump, who won 46.1%.

At the very least, the president's partiality in the election campaign boosts the electability of certain presidential candidates. If the election consists of more than 1 presidential candidate, the president's attitude of taking sides certainly damages the election contest that is taking place.

The Election Law regulates the president's partiality in the election campaign. However, the Election Law regulations still have loopholes. This article discusses these loopholes.

A Right and a Prohibition

The majority opinion states that the president's biased attitude in the election campaign is both a right and a prohibition.

In the context of rights, the president's biased attitude refers to his human right to be involved in elections. The president is an Indonesian citizen who has the right to vote and be elected. This is not regulated in the Election Law, but is regulated in Law Number 39 of 1999 concerning Human Rights (“Human Rights Law”), specifically in Article 43 paragraph (1).

When someone makes a choice, they automatically determine their partiality. With this logic, even though the Human Rights Law does not explicitly regulate whether the right to vote and be elected comes as a package with the right to be partial, the Human Rights Law is still considered to cover both rights. This is the argument supporting the president's right to be partial.

However, the unity between the right to vote and the right to be partial does not apply to Indonesian citizens who have the status of state officials. The reason is that state officials have a “position” that limits their right to determine partiality, including towards presidential candidates in the election campaign.

State officials who side with a presidential candidate are prone to being involved in conflicts of interest. Officials have interests based on their position, while presidential candidates have an interest in winning the election. If an official sides with a certain presidential candidate, it is feared that the official will abuse his position to make the presidential candidate achieve his interests.