Are parties ready to accept defeat?<\/p>\n
Analysts believe only a few of the 48 political parties, which
\nstart campaigning this week, would win in next month's election.
\nMost of them will have to swallow the bitter pills of defeat.
\nChairman of the Human Rights Subcommission for Education and
\nProfessor of Law at the University of Indonesia Charles Himawan
\nconsiders this issue.<\/p>\n
JAKARTA (JP): Democratic countries hail Indonesia's June 7
\nelections as the first free general election in several decades.
\nThey hold that all national elections after 1955 were \"managed\".
\nHowever, they overlook the fact that this 1955 election prompted
\nfirst president Sukarno to take unilateral action to disband the
\ntwo democratically elected assemblies.<\/p>\n
Sukarno disbanded the Constitution Council (Dewan
\nKonstituante) for its failure to draw up a new constitution,
\nproclaiming that the 1945 Constitution, Indonesia's first
\nconstitution, was to be applied as of July 5, 1959, and ruled
\nIndonesia under the guise of this fundamental law for six years.<\/p>\n
Second, he disbanded the elected parliament in 1960 for its
\nfailure to accept his budget proposal. This small piece of
\nhistorical evidence shows that a democratic election in itself
\ndoes not ensure that democracy will work.<\/p>\n
Sukarno's experiment with guided democracy failed. He was
\nofficially replaced by Soeharto on March 11, 1967, who in turned
\nwas replaced by Habibie on May 21, 1998, partly on the strength
\nof the student movement calling for political reform.<\/p>\n
Among the many lofty programs the reform movement envisages,
\nit calls for a democratic system in Indonesia. The thinking is
\nthat democracy will better respect human rights. The right of a
\nperson to participate in determining his government is one such
\nright. The general election is the medium to channel this right.<\/p>\n
However, the Indonesian constituents and the 48 political
\nparties must realize that not all of them will win, and therefore
\nnot all of them can govern the nation.<\/p>\n
The renowned American judge, Learned Hand (1872-1961),
\nobserved that \"how illusory would be the belief that my vote
\ndetermined anything; but nevertheless when I go to the polls I
\nhave the satisfaction in the sense that we are all engaged in a
\ncommon venture\".<\/p>\n
In the case of a nation of 100 constituents, to be able to
\nparticipate in governing the nation, a candidate must be
\nsupported by another 50 votes. If he succeeds, this means that
\nhis group obtains 51 percent and has therefore the right to
\ngovern the nation under the supervision of the remaining 49
\npercent. However, the election is but the beginning of democracy,
\nthe real test comes later.<\/p>\n
Regardless of the dislike of Sukarno for the so-called 51:49
\ndemocracy, if on June 7 the reformists attain 51 percent of the
\nvote and the status-quo supporters 49 percent, then comes the
\nheaviest test for the nation: Because besides elections, there
\nare three more elements which must be observed and implemented to
\nensure the success of the democracy process.<\/p>\n
In our assumption above, since the reformists are the winning
\nparty, they therefore will govern the action for the coming
\nyears. However, if the outcome of the elections shows no single
\nparty majority as evidenced by the recent opinion poll (Kompas
\nMay 17, 1999) then parties will have to form a coalition.<\/p>\n
If this becomes reality, the first thing they should remember
\nis the bitter experiences of Indonesia between 1950-1959, when
\nthere was a new government each year. The possibility of this
\nscenario repeating itself in the 21st century must be avoided at
\nall costs. Otherwise, the struggle for this nation's progress,
\nwhich has cost so many lives and so much agony, would be in vain.
\nNow the three hard questions arise.<\/p>\n
First, while the reformists are in the governing seat, will
\nthey be able to accept criticism from the opposition, that is,
\nthe status quo group?<\/p>\n
Second, will the status quo group accept defeat and channel
\ncriticism through democratic institutions?<\/p>\n
Third, can both sides of the camp refrain from taking
\nvendettas against one another? If the answer is negative, then
\ndemocracy is but an empty slogan.<\/p>\n
However, if the answer is in the affirmative, then Indonesia
\nwill be able to proudly proclaim that democracy is indeed
\nworking, and all evil components that aim to destroy the
\ndemocratic system have been overcome.<\/p>\n
The success of many democratic nations is due partly to the
\nfulfillment of those three elements, the basis of which is the
\ndesire of the people to unite for the development of the country,
\nand not to seek power to simply amass wealth.<\/p>\n
The winning and losing parties must constrain themselves
\nwithin the internationally accepted parameters of democracy. This
\nis in line with the thoughts of the Irish political philosopher,
\nEdmund Burke (1729-1797), who during his lifetime fought for the
\nestablishment of political parties. Burke said: \"When bad men
\ncombine, the good must associate, else they will fall, one by
\none.\"<\/p>\n
Only the association of the good can bring us to a solid
\nresolution in the fields of political and civil rights, as well
\nas in social, cultural and economic rights. With this foundation,
\nthe reformists are sure to bring us all to peace and prosperity
\nagain, but under the umbrella of implemented democratic
\nprinciples.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/are-parties-ready-to-accept-defeat-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}