ELECTION ORGANIZER ETHICS AND A THREE-TIER OVERSIGHT DESIGN FOR SYNTHETIC CAMPAIGN CONTENT

Indonesia’s 2024 General Election was its first cycle in which generative artificial intelligence (AI) content featured prominently, while campaign law predated widespread public access to the technology. This article reads that void not merely as a gap in norms but as an ethical burden transferred to election organizers: where law is silent, the duty to protect electoral integrity still binds the KPU, Bawaslu, and DKPP without adequate legal instruments. Using normative legal research with statutory, comparative, and conceptual approaches, it analyses Indonesian primary legal materials, five comparator jurisdictions, and one industry initiative. Eight gaps are mapped in four clusters: definition and transparency; enforcement authority and actor coverage; data protection and evidentiary standards; and the structural pacing problem. Each is read twice, as a normative gap and as an ethical burden. Constitutional Court Decision 166/PUU-XXI/2023 provides a foundation whose scope requires careful reading, while comparative materials inform the assessment of instruments against authority, proportionality, capacity, and review. The article proposes a three-tier design of co-regulation, technical regulation within delegated powers, and AI provisions in the Election Law revision, supported by the organizers’ code of ethics as the layer readiest to move. The recommendations are prescriptive and require capacity assessment