2004 elections not merely a big fiesta

2004 elections not merely a big fiesta

Imanuddin Razak
Staff Writer
The Jakarta Post
Jakarta
iman@thejakartapost.com

Today, nearly 147 million registered voters will throng
polling booths nationwide with a single-minded agenda; to cast
their votes to elect their representatives for the Regional
Representatives Council (DPD), the House of Representatives
(DPR), the Provincial Legislative Council (DPRD I) and the
Regental/Municipal Legislative Council (DPRD II).

The elections of representatives will be followed by a direct
presidential election on July 5 and probably a second round on
Sept. 20 if none of the presidential candidates manages to secure
a majority in the first round.

In terms of democratization, this year's elections are
considered more democratic as voters will simultaneously vote for
their favorite political parties and have the option to vote for
individual legislative candidates, unlike the party-centric
system used in previous elections where voters only had the
option to vote for parties, and the party leaders later appointed
the various legislators.

No less important is that the results of this year's elections
are expected to help bring the country out of the prolonged
multi-dimensional crisis that it has been mired in since 1997.

Various aspects of the organization of this year's elections
have been examined by experts from different fields of
discipline. They have mostly been critical, however.

Pessimists have expressed doubts whether this year's
elections, with the new format, would bring about significant
change in the country.

The say that the majority, if not all, of the people running
for legislative seats and the presidency are the products of the
New Order. The (legislative and presidential) candidates have
enjoyed the economic glory, although mismanaged, produced by the
New Order regime.

The candidates have also been part and parcel of the New Order
regime's poor legal system, including poor implementation of the
laws, which has been responsible for the country's crises.

In light of this reality, it is therefore understandable that
the pessimists denigrate the political importance of the results
of this year's elections, while acknowledging that the ballot is
necessary as a democratic process.

Still, the show must go on as the general elections are the
only way to achieve a legitimate state leadership and
legislatures. And, whether the nation likes it or not, the
elections will have to proceed and come up with results.

Perhaps it is true that the majority of the candidates are
products of the New Order regime, who have been blamed for the
mess in the country.

But, they are all we have right now and people cannot choose
extra-electoral candidates as their state leaders and
representatives.

The best thing voters can do is to vote for a candidate or
candidates who they think can meet their criteria of good and
credible leaders or representatives. They should cast their votes
for the best ones among the available candidates in contest.

Though it is everyone's individual right, voters and people in
general should not become golput(short for golongan putih,
literally, White Group, by staying away from the polling booths
or not perforating their ballot) as low participation in the
elections will only weaken the credibility of the elected
leaders, which at the end of the day will only hamper efforts to
immediately bring an end to our prolonged crisis.

People should bear in mind that the nation cannot wait for
another five years to start with urgent development programs.
There is a lot of hard work that cannot be put off any longer --
not only by the elected government and legislatures, but every
citizen.

If I may refer to an analysis by H.W. Houweling, an Associate
Professor of International Relations at the University of
Amsterdam; he states that Indonesia needs to immediately and
simultaneously address several critical problems.

"It's not terrorism that is the biggest problem or risk
Indonesia is facing, but corruption, crime, violence, economic
stagnation, unemployment and political institutions that favor
the status quo," he asserted.

"Indonesia needs a strong leader, but accompanied by strong
legal order."

The professor indeed is not suggesting the return of a
Soeharto-like president to power -- as has been recommended by
certain groups of people who prefer the status quo -- but made it
clear that Indonesians must elect the strongest possible among
the available candidates as their president.

He also suggested the presence of strong legislatures to
control the president (or the government).

People must still remember how relatively successful Soeharto
was in bringing prosperity to some groups of Indonesians. But, he
failed to lay down a strong foundation for the establishment and
development of effective control mechanism to prevent any legal
misconduct or violations of the existing laws and regulations.

It is now time for eligible voters to elect a government with
strong leadership. They should not vote for a candidate or
candidates merely because of sympathy or primordial sentiments,
while neglecting the candidates' competence.

People must vote for candidates with strong leadership and
managerial skills as well as vision of the future for both the
legislatures and the state leaders.

At the end of the day, the results of the general elections
will undoubtedly reveal the maturity and true characteristics of
Indonesian people in political terms. It will show whether they
are eager for reforms or prefer the status quo.

It is not wrong for them to vote for a party or presidential
candidate that puts prosperity as the highest priority as people
have been longing for prosperity for quite a long time since the
downfall of Soeharto.

But again people must first elect the most credible
representatives available in an attempt to establish effective
control on the elected president or the government and also to
make sure justice is upheld to avoid past mistakes of poor
legislative control on the ruling government and a poor legal
system.

On the other hand, the people's choice for a candidate or
candidates merely favoring prosperity will also show the failure
of the reform movement to address the issues of economic reform
and good governance, as well as the current leaders' inability to
get the movement back on track.