Search

Printing companies play a central role in the exercise of general elections. However, there have been some issues in the number of printed ballot papers not relevant to the quantity requested by the General Election Commission, and this situation is considered election crime. Article 529 of Election Law implies that the printing company concerned may be subject to imprisonment or fines, but the legislation declares that a jail sentence cannot be imposed on the company. Departing from this issue, this research aims to analyze and find the ratio legis of criminalization of a printing company responsible for producing ballot papers for general elections. With a normative method and statutory, conceptual, and historical approaches, the research discovers that a lack of inaccuracy of drafters in the making of an academic draft on elections, where the drafters ruled out the notions of experts of criminal law and Supreme Court as delivered in a legislation-making session, seemingly gives Article 529 impunity. That is, the criminal sanction that should be imposed on a printing company following ballot paper manufacturing issues governed in Article 529 of Election Law does not guarantee any legal certainty and democratic general elections with integrity. The sanctions imposed on the company concerned should only be restricted to administrative measures like fines and no incarceration should be involved.