Democracy
– a work in progress
Endy M Bayuni ; A
Senior Editor at The Jakarta Post
|
JAKARTA
POST, 13 April 2014
Indonesia
has something to be proud of this week after holding yet another peaceful
general election, further establishing our reputation as the world’s third
largest democracy. This is the fourth democratic elections the country has
held since the departure of dictator Soeharto in 1998. To this day, Indonesia
has never looked back.
The
April 9 poll to elect representatives in national and local legislatures will
be followed in July by the presidential election. Irrespective of who wins
them, these political processes ensure peaceful, orderly and democratic
succession of governments.
Out goes
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono after serving the maximum of two five-year
terms allowed by the Constitution. In October, we will have a new president,
Indonesia’s fifth since 1998. Contrast this with two presidents, Sukarno and
Soeharto, who between them ruled Indonesia during its first 53 years as an
independent state.
Exit
polls of the April 9 election also indicate the resurgence of the Indonesian
Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) as the largest party in the House of Representatives,
a position it last held after the 1999 elections.
It is
debatable how much of this PDI-P victory is owed to the nomination of the
popular Jakarta Governor Joko “Jokowi” Widodo as its presidential candidate,
but if Jokowi goes on to win the election, we will have a PDI-P-led
government. In 2004, the Golkar Party held that position and in 2009,
Yudhoyono’s Democratic Party held the majority at the House.
Indonesia
is now quite comfortable with the constant changing of the guard. These
changes reflected the will of the people who exercised their sovereign rights
through the periodic elections. The elected leaders are too learning that
their positions and influence are not permanent, and that they have to
account for their policies and actions.
There is
nothing unsettling about changing leaders. If they are good, keep them, as
with Yudhoyono with his second term in 2009; if they fail us, dump them, just
as with Megawati Soekarnoputri in 2004. Similarly, we let different parties
take turns in controlling the House.
Gone are
the days when a president stays in office forever or until he dies, and gone
are the days when one party controls the direction of the country for an
extended period. Looking back 16 years, we haven’t done too badly. Indonesia
has enjoyed political stability, which in turn allowed economic development
to take place.
Granted,
some would argue that we could have done so much better perhaps under
different leaders. But that’s precisely the reason why we have elections.
Ours is
a functioning democracy. It is far from perfect but it is good enough to
ensure orderly changes in leadership, and good enough to prevent Indonesia
from reverting to authoritarianism.
Democracy
is a work in progress. It can and should be improved, constantly.
For one,
we still need to deal with the persistent electoral frauds, including the
practice of vote-buying, which have marred the process, fortunately not to
the extent that it undermines the credibility of the election results. We
also need to deal with the erosion of media integrity, as some of the big
media outlets have been blatantly exploited by their owners to support their
election campaigns. And there are some technical problems, such as an
insufficient supply of ballots, which meant were not able vote.
Some
improvements are already guaranteed. The nation has decided that in 2019 the
two elections will be held simultaenously rather than having a three-month
gap. This would mean that any party contesting the election would have the
right to nominate a presidential candidate. It eliminates the need to form
coalitions as well as horse- trading.
With 12
parties contesting the 560 seats in the House, this year’s election was
definitely more straightforward and far less confusing than in 2009 when we
had 38 parties. And when compared with the election in India, which also
started this week and need five weeks to organize, ours also appears to be
more efficient.
However,
whether or not it was effective will only be seen once the results come out.
This is something democracy cannot guarantee. Historically, we see some
democratic elections empower the wrong people, those who don’t believe in
democracy but simply use it as a means to gain power. History has shown that
such errors in judgment have been catastrophic.
Adolf
Hitler rose to power through this process and swiftly brought Germany to war
with its neighbors, sparking World War II. In more recent times, you can put
Thaksin Shinawatra in Thailand and Mohamed Mursi in Egypt among leaders who
successfully exploited the flaws in the democratic system to gain political
power.
Many
consider George W. Bush a poor choice to lead America, after launching two
messy and unnecessary wars during his time, but at least in the United
States, democracy has its own self-correcting mechanism. Egypt does not have
such mechanism, resulting in the military takeover, nor does Thailand,
leading to its perpetual constitutional chaos.
Which
takes us to the question of the July 9 presidential election. With the strict
nominating requirements, we are looking at a small field of three or at the
most four candidates.
Jokowi,
in spite of the disappointing weak “Jokowi effect” will likely remain the
PDI-P candidate. Golkar seems adamant about nominating Aburizal Bakrie and Gerindra
Party, whose candidate Prabowo Subianto is the second most popular candidate
after Jokowi, may also just squeeze his nomination.
Is any
of these candidates right or wrong, for Indonesia? Don’t make a mistake in
July. ●
|
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar