Democracy fiesta and profits

Democracy fiesta and profits

R. Kristiawan, Media Working Group for Election Program Science,
Aesthetics, and Technology Foundation (SET), Jakarta
rkristiawan@yahoo.com

The upcoming elections will take place in the wake of the
media's liberalization, since 1998. At first, this seems positive
-- assuming that the media encourages democratization -- however,
flaws in the new election system will likely ensure the political
domination of those with big money.

Law 12/2003 on the electoral system stipulates in chapter 73,
article 1, that the electronic and print media must give equal
opportunities to electoral participants -- to publish the details
of their campaign. Article 2 stipulates that electronic and print
media should give electoral participants the equal opportunity to
advertise.

Article 2, in particular, could potentially allow certain
participants to dominate the media in terms of airtime or printed
space. The phrase "equal opportunity" -- an ideal concept --
neglects the fact that airtime or printed space is not free of
charge.

In general the mass media, particularly television, holds the
policy -- not to differentiate between political and commercial
advertising -- in short, they charge the same price regardless of
content. Thus, there is no difference between the public service
announcements of non government organizations, the advertisements
of political parties or presidential campaigns, or soap
commercials. Prime time broadcasting now costs between Rp 10
million and Rp 20 million for 30 seconds.

Thus, only "rich" political parties will be able to afford TV
campaigns, (just a daydream for small parties). The campaign-war
has begun. Some parties have already started to block airtime. If
a big party blocks two hours of prime time -- assuming 30 seconds
costs Rp 15 million -- they will need some Rp 3.6 billion.

There is obviously a wide gap between parties financially. A
small party with 2 million members may not be able to raise Rp
100 million to hold a simple meeting.

Since the official end of the 32-year-old New Order regime in
1998, political and media liberalization progressed. Hundreds of
parties suddenly participated in the 1999 elections. "Reform" was
interpreted as unlimited political expression. But our political
system seems unprepared, as indicated by larger-scale corruption
(no longer limited to the higher ranks of bureaucracy) and the
failure to overcome many of the country's problems.

For big parties, the 1999 elections were an important lesson,
as to win the war they had to compete with many small parties.
This never happened under the New Order. The victor could be
predicted before the war started.

Large parties then drew up many strategies to maintain their
position -- mainly in the regulation making process. This is
evident from law no. 12/2003. For example, a convict can become a
presidential candidate. Reform in this context just means that
big parties can do anything they want.

Media liberalization can be traced back to the establishment
of private television stations in the late 1980s. Now people can
choose from 10 channels. The growth of private TV has also
contributed to democratization; at least people are not limited
to TVRI, (although the state-owned channel has formally become a
public-owned media).

Ahead of the "democracy fiesta" of the 2004 elections, the
major priority for parties has become their budget for
advertising.

The implication is that the public will only be aware of the
big parties with money. This is a "win-win" situation for big
parties -- they made the rules of the game through their
domination in the legislature.

If democracy means equal opportunity, there must be rules to
guarantee equality in media expression. If it has been proved
that capital handicaps some parties, we need to reassess how the
political arena operates.

Thus, it is very important to limit the advertising quota of
parties. As Karl-Heinz Nassmacher wrote, "money strengthens
political influence for those who have it, or those who
distribute it". With no regulation, Indonesian democracy will be
simply a matter of money.