<![CDATA[Election supervision is not only a enforcement function but also a socio-institutional mechanism to ensure election rules work in practice. This article aims to analyze the position, authority, and implementation of the role of the Blitar City Election Supervisory Agency (Bawaslu) in the 2024 Election and explain the socio-legal challenges that affect the effectiveness of supervision. The research uses an empirical/socio-legal approach with a descriptive qualitative design. The primary data consists of official Bawaslu Blitar City supervisory documents, which are analyzed alongside laws and regulations and scientific literature. Validity is carried out through source/document triangulation by comparing normative mandates, supervisory practice documents, and previous research findings. The analysis uses the legal culture perspective of Lawrence M. Friedman and public participation of Archon Fung. The results show that Bawaslu Blitar City has developed a supervisory pattern that combines prevention, vulnerability mapping, stage supervision, documentation, enforcement, coordination, and participatory supervision. However, there is a gap between das sollen and das sein, especially when legal norms are confronted with political culture, the potential for money politics, limited legal and digital literacy, and the complexity of digital space supervision. Participatory oversight through the media and stakeholders expands oversight capacity, but it needs to be geared toward informed, inclusive participation, and connected to institutional follow-up. This article asserts that the uniqueness of Blitar City is not solely explained by Bawaslu's normative mandate, but rather by the interaction between legal structures, institutional capacity, legal culture, and local participation networks.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
