LAW ENFORCEMENT IN OVERCOMING ELECTION CRIME (CASE STUDY OF BAWASLU, SEMARANG DISTRICT).

Protests of dissatisfaction with the election process and outcomes, motivated by the numerous violations that could not be resolved and the perception that the organizers had treated them unfairly, demonstrated that there were issues with law enforcement in every election. On the one hand, parties who believe their constitutional rights have been violated, cheated, or treated unfairly will continue to protest if it is not resolved immediately. However, protests may ultimately undermine the legitimacy of the election results. The issues with upholding election law must be resolved comprehensively if elections are to be held in an honest and fair manner and if they are not to be delegitimized in the future. The first thing that must be done is to determine what is causing issues with law enforcement; After that, a comprehensive solution to this issue is sought, resulting in the establishment of a system of election law enforcement capable of guaranteeing free and fair elections. According to international democratic election standards, free and fair elections can be achieved if there are legal instruments that can protect organizers, participants, candidates, voters, observers, and citizens in general from fear and intimidation, violence, bribery, fraud, and other fraudulent practices that will affect the results of the election. This type of research is normative research. The approach used is a statutory approach (statute approach) and a conceptual approach (conceptual approach). Secondary data are used as the data source. Qualitative and descriptive methods were used to analyze the data. Conclusions are drawn using the deductive method, namely concluding from general to specific, especially those related to the research topic, namely law enforcement against election crimes. This research resulted in findings that future election legislation must re-clarify the notion of election administration violations. In this case, administrative violations can be divided into two major groups, namely minor administrative violations, and serious administrative violations. Minor administrative violations are violations that do not have an impact on the election process or the election results so that the election laws and regulations do not have to provide a formulation of sanctions against the perpetrators of the violation. Regarding the decision of the election organizers regarding the determination of the election results, there is a legal issue called an election result dispute. Parallel to that, with the decisions of election organizers that determine the list of voters, election participants, list of candidates for legislative members, campaign schedules and locations, recapitulation of vote counting, and others that fall into the category of non-election results, there are legal issues which can be called election administration disputes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]