Election campaign: A slow start

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.