Accept Golkar victory: Analysts

Accept Golkar victory: Analysts

A. Junaidi, The Jakarta Post, Jakarta

As the ballot counting nears completion, with former ruling
Golkar Party catapulting back into the lead, political observers
are setting their hopes for improvement in the 2009 elections.

"It's the people's vote, and the people's voice is never
wrong, although there is no single explanation for it," said
Daniel Sparinga of Surabaya-based Airlangga University.

Daniel saw Golkar's impending victory as punishment for
President Megawati Soekarnoputri's Indonesian Democratic Party of
Struggle (PDI-P) and her government's poor performance during her
three years in power.

He said many PDI-P supporters had shifted to other parties
with similar nationalist ideologies, mostly the veteran Golkar
party and the upstart Democratic Party, which was cofounded by
Megawati's former top security minister, Susilo Bambang
Yudhoyono.

"So Golkar's victory is due to the weakness of the PDI-P
leadership. People don't see a light at the end of the tunnel
under PDI-P," Daniel said.

The ballot counting, which will conclude in the next couple of
weeks, has so far offered no single majority, with Golkar
securing 17 million votes, closely followed by PDI-P with 16
million.

Daniel did not see the possibility of a coalition between
Golkar and PDI-P because Golkar would take the lead in the July 5
presidential election if it won.

Megawati's husband Taufik Kiemas, a PDI-P leader in his own
right, has repeatedly said the party would form a coalition with
Golkar and seek support from the country's largest Muslim
organization, the Nahdlatul Ulama.

The PDI-P has decided to renominate Megawati as its
presidential candidate.

"I suspect that (Golkar chairman) Akbar Tandjung will win the
party convention and become the party's presidential candidate,"
he said.

The Golkar convention is scheduled for April 20.

Apart from a likely Golkar victory, the legislative election
also yielded the familiar faces of legislative members with poor
performance records.

Daniel said the poor-quality House members hailed not only
from old-school parties, but also from new parties which showed
lackadaisical performances in the loophole-ridden election laws
and regulations.

"In the 2009 election, there will be better legislators, while
improvements will have been made in laws and regulations," he
said.

Separately, executive director of the Center for Electoral
Reform (Cetro) Smita Notosusanto shared Daniel's view, saying the
current situation that resurrected former powers and parties was
not uncommon in a transition period.

"This happened in East European countries where former ruling
communist parties won elections," Smita said.

She saw the election as an indication of progress, as more
than 60 percent of voters had correctly punched not only the
party logo, but also their chosen candidates' photographs.

However, she admitted that the election would produce poor
House representatives, who had been placed at the top of their
parties' candidacy lists.

She agreed that, as no single party would emerge the majority
winner, the election would result in power-sharing or horse-
trading among parties, adding that horse-trading was common in
politics as long as it was conducted openly.

"So we push them to be transparent. We have also drawn up a
proposal on how to deliberate a bill transparently," she said.