Elections commission a crisis in waiting

Elections commission a crisis in waiting

Ong Hock Chuan, Partner, PT Maverick Solusi Komunikasi, Jakarta

Denial is the main cause of crises in organizations. If all
the media reports about the General Elections Commission (KPU)
are even half right the KPU is exhibiting such behavior and
courting a crisis when polling begins on April 5.

Denial comes in many forms, among then are a refusal to
acknowledge the situation as it is, painting an overly optimistic
picture of a less-than-desirable situation, being defensive and
resorting to threats instead of acknowledging and working a
problem out with its partners.

A clear warning signal that the KPU may be acting in denial
was sounded in the front page of Kompas daily newspaper on March
17 with the headline "KPU's optimism needs some honesty". The
article quotes members of the Electoral Oversight Committee as
saying that unless the KPU was more honest about its shortcomings
it would lead to a politicization of results even if there were
minor problems with the vote counting.

The Committee also warned that KPU's excessive optimism would
dilute other parties' willingness to help KPU out of its
problems.

This is good advice that KPU should take. It is very clear
that its behavior pattern is that of an organization in denial.
Persisting in this behavior will alienate whatever goodwill it
has remaining and make it a sitting duck the moment the voting
process hits a glitch.

It would not be so bad if the KPU were the only victim in the
probable event of a vote count gone awry. Unfortunately, the
stakes are much, much higher. And there are serious doubts about
the accuracy of the votes counted within the time frame promised
by the KPU there could be political mayhem.

This is because the parties are now expecting the KPU's
computerized vote counting system to deliver 80 percent of the
results within nine hours from the close of polling. This
projection will therefore ultimately influence their choice for
the presidential candidates.

With so much at stake for the country the KPU should waste no
time in taking stock of its own shortcomings and begin addressing
them.

One of the biggest favors it could do itself is to come clean
about its deficiencies, set new and lower expectations by the
public about its deliverables and ask for understanding and help.

History has shown that the public is very willing to forgive
individuals or organizations that act responsibly and openly,
even if they have committed a huge booboo. History also instructs
that those who refuse to take responsibility for their actions
and act in denial remain unforgiving.

John F. Kennedy's admission of a mistake over the Bay of Pigs
fiasco is an example of the former case. The American public not
only forgave him but also continued to support him once he came
clean. Nixon's continued and persistent denials resulted in him
impeached and disgraced.

There is no shame for the KPU to admit if many of its
objectives are falling behind schedule. Everyone knows that it is
no small task making the electoral system work because of
Indonesia's geography and demographics. There are over 145
million voters in 5,120 districts spread over 18,306 islands,
some of which do not have even basic facilities such as
electricity and telecommunications support.

It is a big job, beyond the ability of a single agency. If the
KPU was open about how difficult it is, where it is falling
behind and to ask for help it will receive at least the
understanding if not the help from organizations and individuals.

The KPU should also start lowering the high expectations that
it has created for itself if there is a high likelihood that it
cannot meet its deadlines.

This is especially important when it comes to the computerized
vote counting process because The KPU has given the impression in
its statements that the public can view the majority of the
results in nine hours after polling closes on April 5.

Given the KPU's track record, first with ballot boxes and now
with managing its logistics, it is fair to question whether the
results would be in by nine hours. It is also fair to question
whether the computerized system is as secure from hackers, virus
attacks and vote manipulation as the KPU claims.

Several IT observers have already pointed out that the
personnel in charge of data entry and other facets of the
technology are not well trained. If they are correct, then the
KPU needs to be less optimistic about when it can deliver the
results or the integrity of the vote counting process. It needs
to begin communicating and conditioning the public on this issue.
Failure to do so is to court the ire of the political parties and
the public.

The KPU has actually done quite well, given the fact that this
is but Indonesia's second round of free elections. It is
certainly not perfect but right thinking people expect and can
forgive an organization for many inadequacies that come with
doing something new. They, however, will not be so charitable if
that organization has been misleading them with excessive
optimism and an inability to own up to the facts.

There is more than two weeks to go for the KPU to manage
expectations and get things right. It should seize this
opportunity to communicate well and reset expectations or face a
crisis of its own making.

Maverick is a public relations consultancy specializing in
issues and crisis management