Indonesian democracy or 'demo-crazy'?<\/p>\n
Ziad Salim, Mataram\/West Nusa Tenggara<\/p>\n
Comments on the prospect of democracy in Indonesia range from
\nthe most optimistic (look at the free and peaceful legislative
\nelection) to less so or even pessimistic (look at the cynical
\npost-election maneuverings of the party leaders, loud
\nprotestation of election results, daily street demonstration
\nagainst practically everything, etc).<\/p>\n
As of now, the optimist may have it right: The election 2004
\nhas been peaceful, the ruling party lost some ground and new
\nparties are emerging, indicating not only a subtle and peaceful
\nshift of power but a democracy in the making.<\/p>\n
Looking beyond election, however, the pessimists may have it
\nright. After all, election is only a (formal) part of democracy.
\nThe true measures of democracy (legislative and executive checks
\nand balances, independent judiciary, institutionalization and
\nrespect for the opposition, law and human freedoms and other
\naspects of civil society) are what separate true democracies from
\nbogus ones.<\/p>\n
On these scores, Indonesian democracy has still got a long way
\nto go. In fact, judging by the frequent and rampant street
\ndemonstration in all cities and towns of Indonesia, a democratic
\npolitical participation is still a lot to be desired.<\/p>\n
It is a historical fact that street demonstrations have been
\nthe most often used (or abused?) means of regime change in
\nIndonesia as nearly all national governments have been brought
\ndown by street demonstrations in one form or another, the latest
\nexample being the fall of Soeharto regime.<\/p>\n
Recently, however, even local governments (Regents of Kampar
\nand Banyuwangi) have been brought down by demonstrations. This is
\nnew and portends of worse things to come.<\/p>\n
When the post-Soeharto government of Habibie was also plagued
\nby street demonstrations, Habibie personally replied that
\ndemonstration was part of democracy. Indeed many believe that
\nsince street demonstrations are activities of the people, they
\nare a form of political participation, hence a legitimate part of
\ndemocracy (democracy being the government of the people).<\/p>\n
But these assumptions are not universally shared: After all,
\nthe people who participate in street demonstrations are not
\nexactly or always representative of the people; secondly, street
\ndemonstration in political parlance is not usually regarded as a
\n\"normal\" form of political participation in a democracy but
\nrather, a non-institutionalized form signaling a bottleneck in
\nthe communication between the government and the governed or lack
\nof venues and avenues for an effective participation and\/or
\nopposition .<\/p>\n
The concept of the \"people\" in democracy has been a subject of
\ncontroversy since its birth. Historically, however, the concept
\nhas been romanticized to mean the government of all the people
\n(hence, the clichi, the government of the people, by the people
\nand for the people) though in reality and in the early years of
\ndemocracy, the poor and the uneducated (including women) were
\nformally disenfranchised or excluded from all forms of political
\nparticipation.<\/p>\n
Now, one-man one-vote is de rigueur in democracy but with it
\ncomes the double-edge threat to democracy, i.e., declining
\nparticipation of those who are knowledgeable of its intricacies
\nand nuances and increase participation of those who are ignorant
\nand disenchanted whose idea of participation is often street
\ndemonstrations.<\/p>\n
Since this form of political participation often leads to
\ntraffic and other public disturbances or violent and bloody
\nconfrontations with the police, a law and order man (usually a
\nmilitary or ex-military man, or a \"Hitler\") who promises to
\nrestore order may emerge through the same democratic process and
\ntake over, killing democracy itself in his wake.<\/p>\n
While Indonesian democracy must worry about all the above, it
\nmust especially worry about the challenge to its nascent
\ndemocracy coming from the street. It is well known that street
\ndemonstration in Indonesia or demo or unjuk rasa can be
\nvoracious, violent and incessant.<\/p>\n
It is probably one of those (along with corruption and
\nconstant fascination with men in uniform) that have become part
\nof the political culture. Daily viewing of the electronic media
\ngives the impression that the country is in total chaos. If it
\ndoes not kill its democracy, it will certainly lead it to what
\nhas been dubbed \"demo-crazy\", a democracy marred by crazy
\ndemonstrations everyday and everywhere.<\/p>\n
That this scares off would-be tourists and future investors is
\ntoo obvious to mention, even if the street demonstrations are
\nonly in one small location somewhere in the vast archipelago.<\/p>\n
But Indonesians appear to have benignly tolerating the demo or
\nunjuk rasa, given its frequency and widespread occurrence. It
\nseems every time there is dissatisfaction with anything, a demo
\nensues.<\/p>\n
The very term unjuk rasa itself even romanticizes the concept,
\nreflecting a certain lack of concern among Indonesians about its
\nseriousness. It is also a misnomer, because what is being
\nunjuked is not rasa or feeling but warm-blooded human bodies not
\ntoo infrequently with sticks, rocks and machetes in their hands.<\/p>\n
It should be called unjuk otot (flexing the muscles) and
\nunderstood as such, i.e., an act of desperate people who fail to
\nparticipate democratically or appreciate the true meaning and
\nnuances of democracy.<\/p>\n
Since no one can ban street demonstration entirely, one can
\nperhaps take it away from the street and put it where it is safe.
\nIn the U.S, most public demonstrations take place in Washington
\nD.C., at Lincoln Memorial Park; London has its Hyde Park where
\nthe frustrated can practice their oratory skills undisturbed and
\nwithout disturbing others; even Singapore is now entertaining the
\nsame idea.<\/p>\n
For Jakarta, Taman Monas can be a great location for demo-
\ncrazy Indonesians to manifest their grievances to their hearts'
\ncontent. In other words, demonstrations can be domesticated by
\nallowing them only at a designated field or park or avenue, under
\na fixed rule and watchful eye of the law.<\/p>\n
To placate those that may be skeptical about the measure, the
\ngovernment may supplement it with several measures meant to
\nreduce the public's sense of alienation and powerlessness with
\nsuch innovative measures as creation of national (or local)
\nombudsman system, institutionalization of opposition, greater
\naccess to those in power all the way up to the President.<\/p>\n
Together, the above may enhance democracy and take street
\ndemonstrations away from the street. At worst, they may be
\npolitically cathartic for the country.<\/p>\n
Indeed, street demonstration, if legalized in certain areas
\nonly, given permits, watched attentively by caring government
\nofficials, grievances accepted and processed properly,
\nsupplemented further with new political access and transparent
\npolitical channels, Indonesian democracy can stay democracy and
\nthe demo-crazies can stay off the street (and those that may want
\nto use it as an excuse to subvert the young democracy may stay in
\ntheir barracks enjoying their military pensions).<\/p>\n
The stake for the country is unambiguous: To stay a democracy
\nor to plunge into a state of constant demonstrations that over
\ntime may sap the strength and energy of its democracy or the
\npatience of its people.<\/p>\n
The writer, who formerly worked with several international
\ndevelopment organizations, can be reached at
\nzeeoddone@hotmail.com<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/indonesian-democracy-or-demo-crazy-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}