Controlled election campaigns<\/p>\n
No sooner were the government directives for the upcoming
\ngeneral election campaigns announced than it was attacked by
\nacademic observers as well as politicians. Representatives of the
\ntwo minor parties, the United Development Party (PPP) and the
\nIndonesian Democratic Party (PDI) immediately voiced their
\nobjections. The ruling was seen as a step backwards and did not
\nreflect any effort of democratization.<\/p>\n
Take for instance the obligation for contestants to have their
\ncampaign speeches screened in advance, or the ruling that a
\nmoderator appointed by the General Election Institute must be
\npresent during radio and television campaign debates between
\ncontestants.<\/p>\n
In defense, the Ministry of Home Affairs argued that the
\nruling was made for the precise purpose of improving the quality
\nof the general election. The obligation for contestants to have
\ntheir radio and television campaign speeches screened before they
\nare broadcast is, according to the ministry, nothing new since
\nthe same measure was taken during previous elections. The
\nrequired presence of a moderator during campaign debates is
\nmerely to ensure an orderly dialog.<\/p>\n
We appreciate the explanation given by the Ministry of Home
\nAffairs public relations department. To us, however, such defense
\nis merely word play. Take for instance the explanation that the
\nspeeches will only be perused, not censored. Obviously we don't
\nhave to fall for such arguments. To us, what is important is the
\nsubstance that is contained in the directives -- that is, the
\neffort that is being made to ensure that the general election
\ncampaigns are well controlled.<\/p>\n
As long as such attempts are made, using previous elections as
\na justification, it may be inferred that improving the quality of
\nour general elections is of no concern to the Minister of Home
\nAffairs. And if the quality of a general election is accepted as
\na yardstick for the quality of democracy itself, then we can only
\nconclude that certain parties among us are content enough with
\nthe quality of our democracy as it exists at present, even though
\nPresident Soeharto has repeatedly stated that the quality of the
\n1997 elections must be better than that of previous elections.<\/p>\n
Actually, in this time of increased globalization, the
\ngovernment as executor of the general elections should utilize
\nthe available momentum to empower the election contestants and
\neducate people in the process. Our society has changed and
\nmatured. Our people have become more intelligent. The government
\nshould have anticipated these changes by conceiving more
\nintelligent policies.<\/p>\n
-- Media Idonesia, Jakarta<\/p>", "url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/controlled-election-campaigns-1447893297", "image": "" }, "sponsor": "Okusi Associates", "sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com" }