A Comparative Analysis of Presidential Recruitment Systems Iin Indonesia and South Korea Implications for Constitutional Democracy and Democratic Transformation
Main Article Content
Abstract
Indonesia and South Korea represent a good example for comparison since they are well-known Asian democracies that had gone through complex periods of transition from military and authoritarianism to democracy. This research is a qualitative and normative-comparative approach of legal research, aim to analyse similarities and differences in constitutional norms and political practices regarding the presidential recruiting systems in Indonesia and South Korea. The analysis concludes that democratic development in both Indonesia and South Korea has fundamentally shifted presidential recruitment from authoritarian control to direct popular elections, though their constitutional frameworks have evolved to address different challenges. While Indonesia and South Korea share similarities as unitary states with presidential systems and a minimum candidate age of 40, their specific constitutional mechanisms for nomination and election differ significantly. Indonesia requires candidates to be nominated in pairs (President and Vice-President) exclusively by political parties or coalitions, often utilizing a two-round voting system to ensure majority legitimacy. In contrast, South Korea allows for independent candidacy, operates without a Vice-President (utilizing an appointed Prime Minister instead), and employs a single-round plurality system for efficiency. Furthermore, South Korea maintains a more robust institutional oversight through the National Election Commission, which holds a higher constitutional standing compared to Indonesia’s electoral management bodies, ensuring stricter control over political financing and recruitment integrity. By tracing these divergences to the constitutional and party-based design of each country’s nomination process, this study contributes to the broader literature on democratic studies by clarifying how formal constitutional guarantees and informal candidate-selection practices jointly determine whether presidential recruitment reinforces oligarchic tendencies or advances democratic transformation.
Downloads
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
References
Antara. (2025, January). Constitutional Court quashes presidential threshold on Election Law. https://en.antaranews.com/news/339986/constitutional-court-quashes-presidential-threshold-on-election-law
Cho, Y. (2024). Political participation and democratic engagement among young voters in South Korea.
Constitution of the Republic of Korea, Constitution No. 10 (1987). https://elaw.klri.re.kr/eng_service/lawView.do?hseq=1&lang=ENG
ConstitutionNet. (2025). Indonesia's constitutional court rules threshold for presidential candidates unconstitutional. https://constitutionnet.org/news/indonesias-constitutional-court-rules-threshold-presidential-candidates-unconstitutional
Dahl, R. A. (1971). Polyarchy: Participation and opposition. Yale University Press.
Dahl, R. A. (1998). On democracy. Yale University Press.
Gallagher, M., & Marsh, M. (Eds.). (1988). Candidate selection in comparative perspective: The secret garden of politics. Sage Publications.
Giugni, M., & Grasso, M. T. (Eds.). (2022). The Oxford handbook of political participation. Oxford University Press.
Haris, S. (2014). Presidensialisme multipartai dan problematika demokrasi presidensial di Indonesia. Jurnal Penelitian Politik, 11(2).
Hazan, R. Y., & Rahat, G. (2010). Democracy within parties: Candidate selection methods and their political consequences. Oxford University Press.
International IDEA. (2000). Capacity-building series 8: Democratization in Indonesia: An assessment. International IDEA.
Isra, S. (2010). Pergeseran fungsi legislasi: Menguatnya model legislasi parlementer dalam sistem presidensial Indonesia. Rajawali Pers.
Winters, J. A. (2011). Oligarchy. Cambridge University Press.
Jefri K., M. (2023). Studi komparasi fungsi kepartaian di Indonesia dan Korea Selatan dalam perspektif demokrasi.
Jung, H. (2013). Meritocracy and political culture in South Korea.
Kim, J. (2024, December 13). South Korea opposition leader urges president’s party to back impeachment over martial law. Reuters. https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/south-korea-opposition-leader-lee-says-impeaching-yoon-best-way-restore-order-2024-12-13
Manurung, C. E., et al. (2022). Perkembangan sistem demokrasi di Indonesia dan relevansinya untuk kehidupan di tahun 2022. Jurnal Pendidikan, Seni, Sains dan Sosial Humaniora, 1(1), 1–16.
Mau, H. A., & Ditisrama, T. (2024). Hukum tata negara Indonesia: Teori dan penerapannya. Amerta Media.
Michels, R. (1915). Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy. Hearst's International Library Co.
Michels, R. (1959). Political parties: A sociological study of the oligarchical tendencies of modern democracy. Dover Publications.
Murphy, W. F. (2007). Constitutional democracy: Creating and maintaining a just political order. Johns Hopkins University Press.
National Election Commission of the Republic of Korea. (2020). Introduction to the electoral and political systems of the Republic of Korea: 21st National Assembly elections. National Election Commission.
National Election Commission of the Republic of Korea. (2026). National Election Commission. https://www.nec.go.kr/site/eng/main.do
Norris, P. (1996). Legislative recruitment. In L. LeDuc, R. G. Niemi, & P. Norris (Eds.), Comparing democracies (pp. 184–215). Sage Publications.
Novalia, N., Emeilia, R. I., Muntazah, A., & Andhikasari, R. (2024). The image of the General Elections Commission (KPU) in the 2024 presidential election. Golden Ratio of Data in Summary, 4(2), 896–902. https://doi.org/10.52970/grdis.v4i2.734
Noviati, C. E. (2013). Demokrasi dan sistem pemerintahan. Jurnal Konstitusi, 10(2).
Pepinsky, T. B. (2025). Cleavages, institutions, and democracy in Indonesia: The 2024 elections in comparative perspective. Journal of Current Southeast Asian Affairs, 44(3), 345–365. https://doi.org/10.1177/18681034251349467
Political Funds Act, Republic of Korea (2018).
Power, T., & Warburton, E. (2021). Demokrasi di Indonesia: Dari stagnasi ke regresi? Kepustakaan Populer Gramedia.
Public Official Election Act, Republic of Korea (2024).
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 62/PUU-XXII/2024.
Putusan Mahkamah Konstitusi Nomor 90/PUU-XXI/2023.
Ramadani, H., et al. (2025). Perbandingan administrasi negara Indonesia dan Korea Selatan dalam mewujudkan pemerintahan efektif dan akunTable. Jurnal Hukum, Administrasi Publik dan Negara, 2(6).
Rolfe, M. (2012). Voter turnout: A social theory of political participation. Cambridge University Press.
Sitanggang, P. A., & Sinaga, B. (2025). Efforts to prevent double voter data on election fairness. Golden Ratio of Data in Summary, 5(2), 252–257. https://doi.org/10.52970/grdis.v5i2.856
Surahman, W. B. (2024). Studi perbandingan kewenangan antara MK Indonesia dengan MK Korea Selatan terkait dengan impeachment presiden. Jurnal Politik, Sosial, Hukum dan Humaniora, 2(1).
The Last Will and Testament of a Lame Duck. (2014). https://history.house.gov/Blog/2014/November/11-17-Lame-Duck/
Thompson, B. (1997). Textbook on constitutional and administrative law (3rd ed.). Blackstone Press.
Undang-Undang Dasar Negara Republik Indonesia Tahun 1945.
Undang-Undang Nomor 7 Tahun 2017 tentang Pemilihan Umum.
Verba, S., & Nie, N. H. (1987). Participation in America: Political democracy and social equality. University of Chicago Press.
Vikalista, E., Warsono, H., Martini, R., Erowati, D., & Muharam, R. S. (2026). Elite-centered regimes as barriers to meritocracy: The case of Indonesia. Frontiers in Political Science, 7. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpos.2025.1687026
Wahyuni, N. (2024). Perbandingan administrasi negara Indonesia dengan Korea Selatan. Jurnal Ilmiah Riset dan Pengembangan, 9(1).
Wardah, S. (2025). Perbandingan sistem politik demokrasi dan otoriter (studi kasus Korea Selatan dan Korea Utara). Jurnal Ilmiah Wahana Pendidikan, 11(5), 189–194.
Wolhoff, G. J. (1955). Pengantar ilmu hukum tata negara Republik Indonesia. Timun Mas.
Yun, S. (2014). Presidentialism and divided government in South Korea. Asian Education and Development Studies, 3(2), 110–121.