The noken system in voting for Regional Head Elections (Pilkada) in Papua represents a form of recognition of indigenous local wisdom that has been practiced for generations. However, its implementation has sparked debate as it is considered to contradict democratic principles and electoral legal provisions in Indonesia. This study employs a normative legal research method using statutory and conceptual approaches. The results indicate that although the noken system has gained legitimacy through Constitutional Court Decision Number 47-81/PHPU.A-VII/2009, in practice it contradicts fundamental electoral principles, namely direct, general, free, secret, honest, and fair elections. Furthermore, the legal basis for the implementation of the noken system is considered weak due to the absence of clear regulation within the hierarchy of laws and regulations, as it is only governed by technical regulations issued by the General Elections Commission. The application of the noken system also has the potential to trigger conflicts, undermine individual voting rights, and create opportunities for political manipulation. Therefore, a comprehensive evaluation of the noken system is necessary, both in terms of legal framework and its practical implementation, along with the establishment of more comprehensive regulations to accommodate indigenous values without compromising constitutional democratic principles.
English
The noken system in voting for Regional Head Elections (Pilkada) in Papua represents a form of recognition of indigenous local wisdom that has been practiced for generations. However, its implementation has sparked debate as it is considered to contradict democratic principles and electoral legal provisions in Indonesia. This study employs a normative legal research method using statutory and conceptual approaches. The results indicate that although the noken system has gained legitimacy through Constitutional Court Decision Number 47-81/PHPU.A-VII/2009, in practice it contradicts fundamental electoral principles, namely direct, general, free, secret, honest, and fair elections. Furthermore, the legal basis for the implementation of the noken system is considered weak due to the absence of clear regulation within the hierarchy of laws and regulations, as it is only governed by technical regulations issued by the General Elections Commission. The application of the noken system also has the potential to trigger conflicts, undermine individual voting rights, and create opportunities for political manipulation. Therefore, a comprehensive evaluation of the noken system is necessary, both in terms of legal framework and its practical implementation, along with the establishment of more comprehensive regulations to accommodate indigenous values without compromising constitutional democratic principles.
Affiliations come from OpenAlex; journal OAI-PMH metadata carries none. Authors without an OpenAlex ID are matched by name, which can merge or split people.