Beyond legitimacy: How power and meaning sustain electoral order in Indonesia?

Abstract

This study examines how electoral order in Indonesia is sustained not primarily through formal legitimacy, but through the interplay of power and meaning, drawing on Anthony Giddens’ structuration theory. While democratic institutions are normatively expected to rely on legal-rational legitimacy to ensure compliance, evidence from Indonesia illustrated through national election oversight practices and micro-level dynamics in culturally unique regions reveals that legitimacy often remains fragile and insufficient to regulate political behavior. Using a qualitative-descriptive approach with literature synthesis, regulatory analysis, and illustrative case materials, this paper argues that electoral stability emerges from two alternative modalities of structuration: domination (allocative and authoritative control over resources, institutions, and social relations) and signification (symbolic frameworks, cultural narratives, and moral authority). These modalities compensate for weak institutional legitimacy by shaping political conduct through resource management, moral persuasion, cultural norms, and narrative framing. The analysis shows that actors such as election supervisors, religious leaders, the media, and local elites play significant roles in reproducing electoral order. They operationalize power through institutional sanctions, resource allocation, and authority, while concurrently shaping meaning through culturally resonant communication, symbolic language, and ethical narratives. As a result, electoral peace in Indonesia is maintained not primarily because laws are accepted, but because social structures generate alternative pathways of compliance and stability. The study contributes to broader debates on electoral governance by demonstrating that in emerging democracies, power and signification may function as the primary stabilizing forces when legitimacy falters.