Postscript to a popular festivity of democracy<\/p>\n
By Marianus Kleden<\/p>\n
KUPANG, East Nusa Tenggara (JP): The bloodshed feared by many
\nanalysts and by the public did not become a reality during the
\nlast political campaign. Peacefulness and brotherhood expressed
\nin the concurrent rallies, simultaneous hoisting of party flags,
\nthe talk on coalitions and the signing of communiques were
\nunprecedented.<\/p>\n
It is true that there were minor conflicts between party
\nadherents and harassment of some parties by other quasi-party
\nfanatics, but a greater part of this unpleasant political by-
\nproduct was better explained as political fabrication rather than
\nby inferring the presence of tense animosities between parties.
\nIt was Gus Dur who pointed out the involvement of \"hired ulemas\"
\nbehind the clashes ((The Jakarta Post, May 31, 1999).<\/p>\n
Another laudable occurrence -- so long championed by human
\nrights activists and freedom fighters -- is the free, honest and
\nfair general election. Except in Aceh and insignificant
\ntransgressions in some of Habibie's strongholds, the predicted
\nintimidation, the \"dawn raids\" -- terminology for the ruling
\nparty's usual practice of browbeating bribery just hours before
\nthe vote -- and cheating in ballot counting so far have not been
\nvalidated.<\/p>\n
Despite Golkar chairman Akbar Tandjung's reluctant acceptance
\nof the preliminary results, many party leaders welcomed them with
\nsmiles. The preliminary results also indicate that efforts to
\nengineer an authoritarian conscience, that is a conscience formed
\nthrough an introduction and inducement of values, views and norms
\nfrom without while ignoring the internal independence, and using
\nreligious sentiments, were ineffective.<\/p>\n
If there is anything regrettable about the recent campaign and
\ngeneral election, then it was not the clashes, harassment nor the
\ninducements, but the unnecessary hara-kiri of party supporters
\nleading to a total death toll of at least 40.<\/p>\n
Several important points can be inferred from the national
\nfestival of democracy.<\/p>\n
First, through a random but quite representative sampling, we
\ncan see the satisfaction of voters as they expressed that the
\ngeneral election was conducted in an honest and fair manner. This
\nis the first real general election carried out after 45 years,
\nsome observers said.<\/p>\n
A new democracy is coming into being and this is the first
\nimportant step. Referring to a booklet What is Democracy?
\nrecently published by the U.S. Information Agency, Indonesia can
\nrightfully be described as making meaningful progress in securing
\nthe birth of the third largest democratic country after India and
\nthe United States.<\/p>\n
A democracy is characterized by people's sovereignty as long
\nas it is manifested in a government with consent by the governed.
\nBut since the consent cannot cover every individual in the whole
\ncountry, it is represented by the majority without ignoring the
\nrights of minorities, which implies a tolerance for political,
\neconomic and social pluralism as well as a readiness for
\ncooperation and consensus.<\/p>\n
A democracy also would guarantee basic human rights, equality
\nbefore the law, a transparent and appropriate legal process and
\nconstitutional limitations on terms in office.<\/p>\n
We are grateful to Habibie for the courageous steps he has
\ntaken in incorporating various political groupings in
\ngovernance, in securing freedom of speech and assembly (including
\nfreedom of determination for East Timor), in creating an
\natmosphere for a free press, in releasing political prisoners
\nand, most importantly, in maintaining free and fair elections.<\/p>\n
However, all this progress is counterbalanced by his
\nawkwardness in Soeharto's case, which does not do any better
\nconcerning the principles of equality before the law and a
\ntransparent legal process, which places him in a difficult
\nposition to retain his presidential position.<\/p>\n
The second point has to do with Akbar Tandjung's reluctant
\nacceptance of the preliminary results of the ballot count. His
\nreluctance gave some hints of an anticipated post power syndrome.
\nBut the fact that there was no blatant rejection of the results
\ninsinuates a dilemma between Golkar's past effectiveness, which
\nwas target-oriented, and the General Elections Commission's
\npresent efficiency, which is process-oriented.<\/p>\n
The dilemma positioned Akbar in acrophobic disorientation.
\nPlaced in the national context, this also is a dilemma between an
\nambitious target-oriented attitude in any aspect of development
\nor pragmatism usually practiced in the past, and a similar
\nambition to ensure a correct process and procedure in running the
\ncountry which can be equated to idealism, despite the fact that
\nit slows down the pace of development.<\/p>\n
Which one is better? For the future government, neither the
\nMachiavellian maxim \"the end justifies the means\" nor the
\nPlatonic ideal is applicable.<\/p>\n
Thirdly, the current pseudo-grouping of political parties --
\npopularly known as pro status-quo and proreform -- will
\neventually evolve into a real regrouping which would gradually
\nrevive the old political order known as nationalists and
\nIslamists.<\/p>\n
A student protest in Ujungpandang exhorting voters not the
\nvote for a female leader nor a party consisting of non-Muslim
\nmembers gave us some clues to this old alignment. Does it make
\nany relevance for the common good of the country?<\/p>\n
Sukarno made his political debut as a nationalist but later
\nbecame a syncretic, culminating in his promoting a possible blend
\nbetween nationalism, religion and communism popularized under the
\nacronym Nasakom. Soeharto came forward as a nationalist but as
\nhis power was increasing in an incredible fashion, he began to
\nmutate into a pseudo-nationalist. In fact, he was a real
\npragmatist for almost his entire tenure in that his economic
\nprogram justified the stability and the stability measures
\njustified the oppression and suppression.<\/p>\n
His pragmatism also was observable in his practical
\ninterpretation of holistic prosperity. Without theorizing too
\nmuch, holistic development of human beings is something like
\nplowing a rice field while building a mosque or a church, or
\nerecting a huge statue of Christ in East Timor after a systematic
\ngenocide.<\/p>\n
In the last years of his office, when his power was declining
\nand challenges threatened his rule, Soeharto adopted a typically
\nIslamic name and lived a seemingly pious life.<\/p>\n
Habibie, with a strong German background, came to Indonesia as
\na technocrat, became the chairman of the Association of Muslim
\nIntellectuals, took over the presidential post from Soeharto, but
\nwhat is his political orientation?<\/p>\n
It is not that clear. What is all this about, after all?
\nAnalogously speaking, it means that as far as humanity is
\nconcerned ideology is very relative and that we are not serving
\nthe ideology, but the country and the people.<\/p>\n
With this in mind, we may conclude that recent concurrent
\nrallies and simultaneous hoisting of party flags were nothing but
\na foresight of future governance where democratic principles are
\nsecured.<\/p>\n
The government does not become acrophobic because of an
\nideological discrepancy, but is guided by the principles of
\neffectiveness and efficiency in bringing about a newly
\ninterpreted holistic prosperity.<\/p>\n
The writer is a social science lecturer at Widya Mandira
\nCatholic University in Kupang, East Nusa Tenggara.<\/p>",
"url": "https:\/\/jawawa.id\/newsitem\/postscript-to-a-popular-festivity-of-democracy-1447893297",
"image": ""
},
"sponsor": "Okusi Associates",
"sponsor_url": "https:\/\/okusiassociates.com"
}