Indonesia's road to democracy

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.