Indonesia's road to democracy

By Sayidiman Suryohadiprojo

This is the second of two articles on the problems of creating a democracy.

JAKARTA (JP): Everybody knows corruption is the main cause of a high cost economy and that it especially originates from the state apparatus. Yet people in government, while highly educated and well experienced, do not work hard enough to curb corruption. There is also no clear strategy on how to improve the bureaucracy, particularly with regard to its low salary compared to present living standards.

With these weaknesses Indonesia is in a bad position vis a vis other East Asian nations. A solution to this problem is necessary if there is to be a healthier state of competitiveness. Democratization must not be separated from this requirement, but must facilitate an effective solution to the problem.

Although discussion has an important place in any democracy, it is important to have a political system that allows for action. An action-oriented democracy best addresses the nation's problem of structural weaknesses.

The democratic political system as stated in the 1945 Constitution meets this requirement. On one side, power of the people is guaranteed through the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR) which has supreme authority in all state matters, further strengthened by the controlling authority of the House of Representatives (DPR). On the other side is the strong position of the President as Chief Executive, who is elected for a five- year term and cannot be relieved of his position within the five- year term, except by a special session of the Consultative Assembly.

There is the general opinion today that the position of the legislature is too weak and that of the executive, in particular the President, too strong. People refer to the statement in the Constitution which says that the President and his executive body (the cabinet of ministers) are not subordinated to the House, but must "listen carefully" or must pay full attention to the wishes of the House. It is said that this condition makes the Executive too strong in relation to the Legislature and the people.

Yet this condition suits Indonesia with its many weaknesses, because the government is action-oriented rather than talk- oriented. The government can get things done, as proved by Indonesia's progress during the last 25 years.

The House can still function as a valuable representative of the people by strongly controlling the actions of the Executive and speaking out if there are any shortcomings in the government's performance.

For political reasons, the government, including the President, does listen to the House if it is forceful enough. The strength of the House is the result of an appropriate election system which guarantees that members of the House really represent the people. In addition, the strength of the House depends on its actions, including the implementation of the rights of the House in its interaction with the Executive.

The democratic setup as stated in the 1945 Constitution is therefore the most suitable system for Indonesia. If it does not function properly today it is due to human shortcomings and not because of any shortcomings in the Constitution. What we must do is improve the implementation of the system.

If there is a need for change in the system, it is in the general election system. With the present election system members of the People's Consultative Assembly and the House are not elected by the people, but are selected by the political parties from their members. They can be "recalled" at any time by their political parties. They therefore obviously focus more on the wishes of their political parties rather than those of the people.

There are people who are unsatisfied with the system as mandated in the 1945 Constitution and would prefer the parliamentary system which was implemented in Indonesia from 1950 until 1959. They say that during that period democracy flourished in Indonesia. However, that is not an objective description of the condition at that time. It is true that the political parties fared well, but the nation in general suffered from political instability. The government changed almost every six months, depending on what political games the parties played in parliament. Consequently no government lasted more than one year and none realized their programs.

Such a setup denied the real goal of democracy, namely the welfare of the people at large. It is possible the adoption of guided democracy by Sukarno after 1959, a system closer to autocracy than democracy, was a reaction to the chaotic political situation of the parliamentary system before that.

It would therefore be rather shortsighted if today we proposed applying a parliamentary system while there is a need for political stability to continue and improve national development.

There are also people who want to adopt the U.S. democratic system. Indonesia's system is actually similar to America's in that both countries have presidents. However, the U.S. Congress has a very strong position relative to the country's president. If such a system was implemented in Indonesia there would never be enough opportunity for action. Not only would it be more talk- oriented, the lack of action as a general Indonesian weakness would not be compensated by an action-oriented government.

Of course, the 1945 Constitution's system is not perfect. Yet, considering the characteristics of the people in general, it is the most suitable system for Indonesia. In relation to the present international environment, the present system guarantees the maximum possibility for creating competitiveness. What matters now is how to implement and operate that system properly.

There are four more factors which are important to the democratization process in Indonesia. These are the improvement of the judiciary; the establishment of a larger and more capable middle class; a more balanced, free and responsible press; and autonomy of the regions. Without these four factors democracy is only a pretense.

The judiciary today is in bad shape. Not only is it obligated to use obsolete colonial laws; it is also plagued by corruption which has spread to many parts of the judiciary. Here again, salaries are way short of meeting basic necessities. It will take a lot of effort and wisdom to achieve a really dependable judiciary, but high priority must be given to its improvement. Besides its importance in relation to democratization, it also plays a significant role in many aspects of national development.

It is difficult to visualize a healthy and strong democracy without a strong and large middle class. The situation in Indonesia today is still far from satisfactory as a heritage of the colonial past. It is therefore important for the private sector to be enhanced.

In particular, there must be a large increase in the number of small and medium enterprises which must become the bulwark of a strong and large middle class. However, it will be quite difficult to develop a strong entrepreneurial class if there is no proper solution to the characteristic weaknesses mentioned earlier. Education and leadership are important factors for that purpose. This again indicates how important it is to have an action-oriented democracy.

A free and responsible press must provide the necessary social control for a healthy democracy. This is important in an era in which so much is dominated by information, and therefore instrumental to national development.

The press still needs improvement. There is still too much government intervention, but also the quality of the press is in many cases questionable. It is increasingly dominated by individuals and groups with strong financial backing, each of them representing different political interests which are not necessarily conducive to national interest.

It is encouraging that the government has finally started to give more autonomy to regional governments. Although it is being done slowly, there is at least hope for a better future.

Centralization has lasted too long in Indonesia. However, there are many factors besides democratization that require the distribution of power to the regions, including security requirements.

There are many problems the public must face before democracy becomes a way of life, but with good intentions and the willingness to act, solutions will definitely come.

The writer is former governor the National Resilience Institute, now an ambassador-at-large to the Non-Aligned Movement.