Democracy 'but a concept' in RI

Democracy 'but a concept' in RI

Sri Wahyuni, The Jakarta Post, Yogyakarta

The much-vaunted reform movement has helped Indonesia build a
democratic infrastructure but the country has yet to develop
democratic practices, a noted political analyst says.

Speaking at a seminar here on Monday, Harold Crouch of the
Australian National University said Indonesia had actually done
quite well in establishing an adequate democratic framework since
1998.

The formal constitutional system, he said, had provided an
infrastructure that enables the practice of real democracy. Yet,
a democratic infrastructure alone was not sufficient to guarantee
that democracy would work well.

"These days we hear many complaints about the behavior of
politicians who have been elected in free and democratic
elections," Crouch, a specialist in Southeast Asian politics,
particularly those of Indonesia, told the seminar, held to mark
the 50th anniversary of Gadjah Mada University's School of Social
and Political Sciences.

Also speaking at the forum was former People's Consultative
Assembly speaker Amien Rais, who is an alumni of the school.

"Not only do we hear many stories about corruption among
officials and legislators, but every few weeks we read about
democratically elected politicians being convicted and sent to
jail," Crouch added.

A democratic political infrastructure, therefore, did not
guarantee good government, but only made it easier to introduce
reforms that could improve the quality of governance.

"It, therefore, would not matter whether a head of government
is elected directly or indirectly, whether an election is held
under a district, proportional representation, or a mixed system.
It also would not matter whether it is a unitary state or a
federal constitution.

"All these systems are 100 percent compatible with democratic
principles. You can't say that one type is in principle more
democratic than others," he said.

The choice between these alternatives, he said, was basically
a pragmatic one. It all depended on how well they worked in
practice in the particular political, social and economic
circumstances of a particular country.

"If they work well, that is good. If they don't work so well,
then just change them," he said.

The choice of an electoral system, for example, could make a
real difference in practice not because one system was more
democratic than another but because one system might be more
appropriate to the particular problems, challenges and
circumstances facing a country.

"I do not intend to argue that this system or that system
would be best for Indonesia. The point is that choice of
electoral system is not primarily a matter of democratic
principles but depends more on the particular problems of a
particular country."

"The medicine that the doctor prescribes depends on the
illness. A medicine that can cure one disease can do a lot of
harm for a different disease," he said.