A dim view of RI's general election

Partai, Pemilu dan Demokrasi (Parties, General Election and Democracy) By Arbi Sanit Pustaka Pelajar, Yogyakarta, 1997 XXX and 253 pp. (including index).

YOGYAKARTA (JP): In the current political bustle towards the general election in Indonesia, the record shows consistent violations committed by all of the parties.

Criticism and protests by one party against another, or directed toward security forces and the government, have added to the commotion. After one party makes a maneuver, another will seek to outdo them, only serving to raise the political temperature. It is the community which is the final victim.

Rivalry between the United Development Party (PPP) and Golkar, or among the splintered factions of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI), have led to violent, brutal acts which were absent from previous elections. In Pekalongan and Wonosobo, friction between PPP and Golkar stirred up public anger and caused riots.

In several towns, the PDI faction led by Soerjadi was nearly always opposed by Megawati supporters. In Yogyakarta and Jakarta, PPP stated they would boycott the campaigns. The question is what makes their rivalry reach as far as the villages? After all, the general election will only choose 425 people's representatives. Meanwhile, 575 other persons people are simply appointed.

This reality gives cause for worry. Even if a political party won 100 percent, the seats they got in the MPR would still be less than the seats for the appointed members. What's more, those in power could screen candidates they did not like.

In this political context, Arbi's book endeavors to offer a very relevant idea for the present condition -- a revitalization of political parties through the election mechanism. In his observation, the general election in Indonesia has never been exempted from political corruption. Historical records show that the most democratic is considered the one in 1955. In the New Order era, many observers think that the Armed Forces showed a more neutral attitude in the 1992 general election, or, in other words, they did not take sides. This neutrality paid dearly in the decline in Golkar votes everywhere.

Arbi is of the opinion that if there is a decline of one of the three-pronged powers of the New Order government, such as the bureaucrats, the military and the technocrats, it will affect the Golkar votes. The author sharply criticizes the political mechanism carried out by Golkar in each general election. He mentions violations often committed by the government and security authorities to support Golkar.

Arbi believes that as such Golkar's position becomes a source of disaster for the life of political parties in general, even for Golkar as a party. The identification of Golkar as a party owned by the government makes it incapable of taking a critical stance towards the executive power. The political actors who could contribute directly to the political process are those who are in the first circle of the power.

In view of these tendencies, it is inevitable that political parties should be given a greater role. So far, at each general election, there has hardly ever been a mechanism for power sharing among the parties. Consequently, the general election only becomes a source of legitimation of the government, while other parties are mere "cheerleaders".

General elections in Indonesia have rarely been able to avoid violence and brutality. As the general election has been made a political tool to give legitimation, a decrease of votes is not acceptable or cannot be considered as natural. It is understood as the weakening of the people's support to the regime in power. A decline in the number of votes is often interpreted as a form of the people's resistance against the authorities.

If the general election is understood as the process of returning the people's sovereignty through the election of their representatives to the House of Representatives, the general election does not need to be understood as something absolute. It means that if the people's votes are returned in the form of their trust in their representatives, it does not need to become an obligation. The people are allowed to freely determine their support without any coercion whatsoever. This principle is certainly inherent with the values of democracy, in which the people's voice is respected through the constitutional mechanism and a difference is accepted as an unavoidable reality.

In the context of a model or a system of election, Arbi has proposed a revision of the current model to a balanced proportional system. He sees this as one that tends to keep away the representatives of the people who have elected them and that opens possibilities for political talk like hopes, promises, gifts and bribes.

Consequently the people's representatives tend to become the servants of the authorities or of themselves, because they are separated from the people who have elected them. Arbi has proposed a system of districts in the general election. Although this system carries no small consequences, it is considered that the people will have greater possibilities to channel their aspirations.

One of the important points put forward by the author is that the realization of democracy in the political parties cannot be separated from the involvement of each political party participating in the election. So far in the general election, the political parties have always been on the sidelines, e.g. they are only involved in the Election Supervision Committee, witnesses, members of the election committee. On the other hand, it is almost assured that the whole technical implementation is controlled by the bureaucracy, which is merely an extension of Golkar.

A competitive general election is apparently still far from our hopes. However, it is one of the criteria to determine the democracy content in a general election. In some countries, each political party the right to mobilize the masses and the freedom to associate and assemble in the run-up to the election. But here it is the contrary. In the context of a general election this can be qualified as one of the impediments to realize a competitive general election.

This book is divided into three parts. It is an important contribution to the implementation of a more competitive general election and the creation of sound political parties. In this kind of sociopolitical situation, the book needs to be read by whoever wishes for democracy in this country to fare better.

-- A. Wisnuhardana

The writer is chairman of the Forum of Humanities and Social Studies in Yogyakarta.