Fair scrutiny necessary for informed choice<\/p>\n
Anton Doni, Jakarta<\/p>\n
In just two days time, Indonesians will vote in the nation's
\nfirst direct presidential election.
\n No less than 150 million voters are expected to attend polling
\nstations in a show of support for either the incumbent, President
\nMegawati Soekarnoputri or her former chief security minister Gen.
\n(ret.) Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono. The new president will lead the
\ncountry until 2009.<\/p>\n
The quality of our analysis of the candidates seems to have
\nprogressed significantly. Remarkably, the sensitive issue of
\ncandidates' flaws is now discussed openly.<\/p>\n
Voters are more engaged in the election process and more
\ninterested in the qualities of the candidates. While one of the
\nchoices is the incumbent -- who as vice president replaced
\nAbdurrahman \"Gus Dur\" Wahid in July 2001 -- the leadership
\ncapacity and platforms of both are scrutinized in depth.<\/p>\n
But, this focus and openness must be accompanied by other
\nattributes, such as fairness and honesty, particularly when
\nclaims are made without the provision of supporting material, or
\nwhen different value systems operate within our society.<\/p>\n
Our discourse should increasingly be a truthful one, where
\nclaims are backed by solid facts. This would allow others,
\nincluding a candidate's opponent, the public and other observers,
\nto work with the facts and test the validity of the claims made.<\/p>\n
The current public discourse on the candidates strays from the
\ntruth on too many occasions. The following issues may assist us
\nin making a fair decision:<\/p>\n
First, an issue related to pluralism that currently works
\nagainst Susilo. Many people raised their eyebrows when the
\nCrescent Star Party (PBB), a party which openly campaigns for the
\nimplementation of sharia, joined his camp. Later, the progressive
\nProsperous Justice Party (PKS) also supported Susilo after their
\ncandidate Amien Rais was eliminated in the April 5 election. His
\nrunning mate, Jusuf Kalla, is rumored to be antiChristian and
\nantiChinese. Based on this, one wonders whether Susilo's
\ncharacter is really that strong.<\/p>\n
Megawati's pluralistic stance is widely recognized. The
\ninclusion of the Prosperous Peace Party (PDS) in her coalition,
\nhowever, may be perceived by many as too pro-Christian.<\/p>\n
The second issue is militarism. It is claimed by many that the
\nvictory of Susilo would return power to the military. While it is
\nnot a serious issue for ordinary people, it should have been
\nclarified that a former military man would not necessarily lead
\nin a militaristic manner. While some military traits may be
\nuseful elements of leadership, this style of leadership is not
\napplicable to the current democracy. If it was applicable, there
\nwould be something wrong with our democratic system.<\/p>\n
Megawati is a civilian, but can we conclude that she really
\nacted as a model civilian leader during her three-year tenure?<\/p>\n
Third, is related to the speculation that many senior military
\npersonnel are \"surrounding\" Susilo. It is quite problematic to
\nsay that they are worse than corrupt civilian politicians. It is
\nunclear who they are, whether they are really bad advisors, and
\nwhether Susilo is, in fact, inferior to them.<\/p>\n
Megawati is often described as being too easily swayed by the
\nmilitary.<\/p>\n
Another quality to be improved upon in facilitating the kind
\nof discourse that is desperately needed in this election season
\nis fairness, particularly when dealing with different societal
\nvalues.
\n Here, the values of different groups and individuals must be
\nconsidered to achieve equality.<\/p>\n
Suppose one person values a certain cause above all others, it
\nis vital that they realize that others may not share the same
\nvalues. This is because, in hard times, most people prioritize
\ntheir basic needs, and are unable to think beyond the very real
\nissue of putting food on the table.<\/p>\n
Another issue related to fairness is the support for pribumi
\n(native Indonesians) in the economic field that would be
\nexercised by the Susilo-Kalla team in the form of a series of
\n\"affirmative actions\" on their election.<\/p>\n
It is understandable that this idea, particularly promoted by
\nKalla, is strongly rejected by many Chinese-Indonesians. It could
\nbe interpreted as discriminative and does not suit their sense of
\njustice. Most Chinese-Indonesians here have struggled very hard
\nfor economic success, even when their political participation was
\nseverely limited. So, any idea that is primordial in nature
\nshould basically be rejected.<\/p>\n
But the rejection of such an idea should be balanced with
\nanother understanding: that there are many citizens crying out
\nfor better economic conditions -- either for business, or just
\nfor better living. They may lack many things, including
\neducation, a network, discipline, skills or capital.<\/p>\n
So the use of the pribumi concept may be unfair, but another
\nsolution should be offered. In that sense, the marketability of a
\nleader who has the drive to bridge the gap between the advanced
\nand the underdeveloped is understandable.<\/p>\n
Supporters of Susilo may say, \"If you want change (for better
\nor worse), Susilo is the choice\". But, Megawati's supporters will
\nreply, \"She has proven her track record, while her opponent can
\nonly make promises.\"<\/p>\n
Elections are a time to build our capacity to make quality
\ndecisions based on accurate information. Because, during
\nelections, ordinary people are given the privilege of having
\ntheir say.<\/p>\n
The writer is head of The Jakarta Post's Research and
\nDevelopment Unit.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/fair-scrutiny-necessary-for-informed-choice-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}