Election campaign: A slow start

Jusuf Wanandi Member, Board of Trustees Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) Jakarta

Campaigning for the legislative election in Indonesia kicked off on March 11 in a slow, almost pathetic manner. There might be several reasons for that. The political atmosphere before the campaign started was calm and almost serene, seemingly because everybody is tired after all the tension and upheaval since 1997. And everybody, while looking to the elections for a better future, also believes that their party has a good chance to win. So, why rock the boat and create tension.

Another reason is that the General Elections Commission (KPU) was late in preparing the administrative and logistical requirements for the elections, as well as in conducting public education campaigns to create awareness and excitement for the general election. However, it is expected that in the last week of the campaign, more fire and sparks will fly. In general, Indonesia's general elections have been relatively peaceful and there is no reason to believe this one is not going to be the same.

In fact, usually there is a festive atmosphere during election time. And since the April 5 elections will be a triple one, namely for the House of Representatives, the Council of Regional Representatives and for the local legislatures, it will be the biggest elections event not only for Indonesia but perhaps also for the world, involving over 600 million ballots. But more importantly, it will be a free and democratic election, the third since 1955 and 1999.

As anticipated, Megawati's Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) has shown how much money it has acquired since she has been in power. PDI-P is the most visible party in terms of the attributes, leaflets and other propaganda materials such as flags and T-shirts. Whether that will translate into votes is still a big question mark. PDI-P's target is to get 40 percent or more of the seats in the House.

Golkar, the other major party, has also demonstrated that it has become a new party and has recruited many new faces as legislative candidates. In the campaign it also has showed that it still has effective political machinery it can depend on, outside of Java as well as in Java itself. This could be crucial for reaching its target of a minimum of 30 percent of the seats in the House. It has also been aided by the decision of the Supreme Court to dismiss the lower court's conviction of Golkar leader Akbar Tandjung for corruption.

Akbar's acquittal is also important for the morale among Golkar's rank and file, since he has been instrumental in engineering Golkar's renovation and consolidation after 1999. Of course, his acquittal aroused a lot of negative reaction from some notable lawyers and NGOs.

But the Supreme Court's majority decision, by four of the five-member panel, must be taken as the last word in the legal and juridical aspects of the case. This is especially true since the chairman of the panel, Chief Justice Lotulung, is a very well respected and honorable jurist. Therefore, the verdict cannot be lightly criticized.

Of course, Golkar needs to redress the negative political aspects and the low public acceptance of the decision. The party has to show that it does have a credible program to fight corruption, and that if it is in power it will appoint credible people in the law enforcement part of the government, such as the police chief, the attorney general and the minister of justice.

After all, the case of Akbar is not very different from that of Alain Juppe, a former prime minister of France, or minister Graff Lambsdorf and former chancellor Helmut Kohl of Germany, who were accused of receiving money for their parties. In fact, Akbar was only implementing then president Habibie's instructions.

Moreover, Akbar Tandjung has never been considered or thought of as a corrupt person during his tenure in government and as a politician. In the end, the results of this election for Golkar can be seen as an indication of the people's opinion of Akbar's case.

Most analysts predict that the big five or six parties will remain in the big league, although the rankings might change. It is expected that this time Golkar might be the number one party in the House because it is now in the same position that PDI-P was in 1999, namely as the main opposition party.

Moreover, the current government has had serious problems in overcoming corruption, solving the problems of unemployment and lack of security, as well as responding to increased social justice issues and providing education and health for the people.

Golkar has the best party machinery, especially in the newly autonomous regions, where they are already ruling. It should be noted that 48 percent of all governors and 36 percent of all regents are Golkar members. On the other hand, the PDI-P is experiencing serious internal rifts.

The United Development Party (PPP) will have difficulty staying number three in terms of House seats because it is also divided, and its leader, Vice President Hamzah Haz, has become a controversial figure due to his political statements. The National Awakening Party (PKB), the number four and Gus Dur's party, remains popular in East Java and to some extent in Central Java, and its main supporters will still come from the NU.

The National Mandate Party (PAN), the number five and Amien Rais' party, now has weaker party machinery than five years ago. It has tried to mobilize support from its main constituency, namely Muhammadiyah members, but this effort appears to have backfired.

The third tier in the House was led earlier by the Crescent Star Party (PBB), but since it is also divided, the chances are that it might be demoted and overtaken by the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS). The PKS is a consolidated party and has shown responsible leadership in the anti-Iraq war movement. It might increase its seats, perhaps by 100 percent, but from a low base. Because it is more of a cadre-based party, it is likely to remain rather small. Maybe if it changes its strategy in the future and becomes a mass-based party, it could expand faster.

To make a preliminary conclusion, it can be said that in a democratic election there are always surprises. Only when these legislative elections have been held many times under almost the same principles and system, a reasonable prediction of the outcome can be made.

The presidential election will be held directly for the first time. It is not obvious what factors will influence the people's choice. Will it be the same factors as in the legislative election? If so, the main factors will be support from solidarity groups in society and party machinery. Alternatively, it could be the name recognition and popularity of the candidate that will determine the winner. Both may be important, but only the results will tell us which was the most important factor.

It may well be that the results of the legislative elections will also have a major influence on the outcome of the presidential election. Winning the legislative election could give a political boost to a party's presidential candidate.

So, the legislative election will make up one of the most powerful institutions of the state, because no legislation, budget or appointment of important officials will be valid without its consent. It will also have some real influence on who will become the chief executive of the executive branch, namely the president.

Violence and tension are not expected during the legislative election. There are worries that the elections will not run smoothly because the General Elections Commission, consisting mainly of scholars or representatives of NGOs, does not have sufficient managerial experience to run one of the most complex and difficult elections in the world. Its efforts, nonetheless, should be appreciated. It too is doing this for the first time.