Your new experience awaits. Try the new design now and help us make it even better

ORIGINAL RESEARCH article

Front. Polit. Sci.

Sec. Comparative Governance

Volume 7 - 2025 | doi: 10.3389/fpos.2025.1630335

This article is part of the Research TopicPragmatism and Democratic Backsliding: Local Election Dynamics in Southeast AsiaView all articles

Normalizing the Illegal: Public Perceptions of Vote-Buying in West Bandung Regency and Its Democratic Consequences

Provisionally accepted
Yusa  DjuyandiYusa Djuyandi1*Kiki  Pratama NugrahaKiki Pratama Nugraha2Agus  SugihartoAgus Sugiharto3Mohamad  Hafifi JamriMohamad Hafifi Jamri4Abdul  Rauf RidzuanAbdul Rauf Ridzuan4
  • 1Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesia
  • 2Polsight Indonesia, Bandung, Indonesia
  • 3Indonesia University, Depok, Indonesia
  • 4Universiti Teknologi Mara (UiTM), Melaka, Malaysia

The final, formatted version of the article will be published soon.

Generally, illegal activities are taboo to discuss, let alone perform. But does vote-buying carry the same stigma, or is it instead normalized as part of election tradition? This research investigates how the public perceives vote-buying practices and its impact on democracy, using a case study of West Bandung Regency, Indonesia. A quantitative survey was conducted on 1,200 respondents from November 10th to 14th, 2024, approximately two weeks before the 2024 Regional Elections (Pilkada). The findings reveal that vote-buying, despite its illegality, is not heavily stigmatized in the public eye. Nearly half of the respondents rationalized the practice in elections, and almost all of these respondents expressed willingness to accept money from candidates. Interestingly, a majority of those willing to accept money still stated they would vote according to their conscience-not the will of the vote "buyer"-in the secrecy of the polling booth. Furthermore, respondents tended to be responsive to the amount of money offered: the larger the sum, the more likely they were to comply with the payer's wishes-vice versa. These findings make a significant theoretical contribution by demonstrating that votebuying, while widely considered wrong both legally and morally, nonetheless enjoys a high level of social acceptance. However, they contrast with traditional reciprocity theory, which assumes vote-buying functions like a transaction for goods/services; here, money does not always translate directly into votes, as voters still wish to vote according to their conscience. Practically, this research urges policymakers to address vote-buying systemically. It also criticizes previous solutions proven ineffective and suggests potential best solutions.

Keywords: Vote-buying, Money politics, clientelism, public perception, elections

Received: 17 May 2025; Accepted: 16 Jul 2025.

Copyright: © 2025 Djuyandi, Nugraha, Sugiharto, Jamri and Ridzuan. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) or licensor are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.

* Correspondence: Yusa Djuyandi, Padjadjaran University, Bandung, Indonesia

Disclaimer: All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.