Golkar and the law

What many observers had expected and activists had feared became reality on Tuesday. The Supreme Court, in what it termed a conclusive session on the subject -- delayed one day because of the assassination of one of its justices -- rejected demands for the freezing of the Golkar Party and its disqualification from the 2004 general election.

As anticipated, the court's decision was greeted with cheers by pro-Golkar groups but angered prodemocracy activists who were waiting for the ruling in front of the Supreme Court in Central Jakarta. Scuffles occurred between the two groups, forcing security forces to restore order by firing warning shots and lobbing a few tear gas canisters into the crowd.

As was also widely expected, the panel of justices ruled that the charge -- brought by a number of plaintiffs, including Sri Bintang Pamungkas, a long-time opponent of former president Soeharto's New Order regime -- that Golkar had received donations far in excess of the amounts allowed under the law had not been proven.

In brief, the court ruled that the evidence brought against the party constituted little more than conclusions based on hearsay. As a token of displeasure over the decision -- and also as a sign of the public's lack of regard for the judiciary in postcrisis Indonesia -- a protester threw a chicken into the courtroom as soon as the ruling was announced.

In contrast to the tumult in and in front of the Supreme Court, the Golkar headquarters in Central Jakarta remained strangely undisturbed throughout the proceedings. In fact it looked almost abandoned, except for a few uniformed guards standing by. Even so, it appears safe to assume that this calm can be ascribed more to the public's current political fatigue rather than to popular support for the party.

Most Indonesians remember Golkar's predominant role in upholding president Soeharto's dictatorial regime from 1967 until his downfall in 1997, and there are still many unhealed wounds from this period. The press is still traumatized by decades of relentless censorship that was faithfully executed by top leaders of Golkar. The country's lack of quality political leaders and statesmen is seen by analysts as the result of those decades of suppression. And Indonesia's current economic woes are ascribed by many as leftovers of Soeharto's corrupt regime which Golkar helped to keep in power.

Since Soeharto's downfall in May 1997 and the beginning of a new era of democratic reform, Golkar has taken measures to rid itself of that stigma, including renaming itself Golkar Baru, or New Golkar, to indicate its supposed break with the past. It appears, though, that it takes more than a little change in name to convince the public that Golkar has indeed transformed itself from a dictator's tool into a genuine political party fit to help the nation build a new, democratic society on the ruins left by the old regime.

As things stand at this point, though, Indonesians have little choice but to recognize Golkar's existence, in line with the decision by the Supreme Court on Tuesday, for whatever it is worth. There have been allegations of corruption in the country's judiciary, including in the Supreme Court. To disregard the court's decisions, however, would be to invite chaos. The current reform movement has brought to light the need to clean up so many institutions that the job sometimes seems impossible even to begin.

However, pessimism is of no help. Somehow the job must be done. As for Golkar, all this turmoil could probably have been prevented had it listened to the good advice at the start of the reform movement that it disband itself and reorganize by bringing in new faces, not just a new name, to make its claim of having emerged as a democratic organization more credible to Indonesians.