'Jakartans tend to shift between Golkar and PPP'
JAKARTA (JP): Golkar's electoral competition with the United Development Party (PPP) in the city reflected people's desire for change, according to a political scientist.
And sociologist Paulus Wirutomo said the results reflected a growing political awareness in urban areas.
In the election for Jakarta's seats in the House of Representatives, as of 7 p.m. Saturday, PPP had 2.1 million votes or 28.46 percent; Golkar 3.0 million votes or 57.5 percent, and the Indonesian Democratic Party, 104,763 votes or 14.04 percent.
For the Jakarta council, Golkar got 736,872 votes more than PPP.
Golkar's gains in the city were among the lowest in the country, though a party official said the result was close enough to their 60 percent target.
Arbi Sanit of the University of Indonesia said that in each election, Jakartans have tended to vote either for PPP or Golkar, depending on their aspirations.
If people wanted development progress, they would vote for Golkar, he said Saturday.
"If Jakartans want change they vote PPP. Once, in 1977, PPP even won the general election here," Arbi told The Jakarta Post.
The closest competition between PPP and Golkar was in South Jakarta. As of 7 p.m. Saturday, in South Jakarta PPP had won 49.3 percent, or 538,208 votes; Golkar 49 percent or 534,029 votes and PDI, 1.7 percent or 18,714 votes.
Arbi said PPP won in South Jakarta because the area was mostly residential, unlike Central Jakarta. The votes reflected the aspirations of the middle to lower income group, he said.
Preference
Sociologist Paulus, who also teaches at the University of Indonesia, said the competition between PPP and Golkar in each election here reflected Jakartans' courage in stating a preference for one of the contestants.
"The provisional results show that in Jakarta people have more political awareness than in other provinces, where Golkar gained most of the votes," Paulus said.
"Jakartans are more dynamic. They've seen a political setback within the (rift-ridden) PDI and have made their own decision," Paulus said.
He said the election results should be further analyzed to ascertain whether the increase in the PPP vote was because people were reluctant to vote for the ruling Golkar, or the PDI minority, or because they wanted "to help create a political balance."
Also, PPP voters might have thought PPP would prioritize low income people and advocate their interests, Paulus said.
Arbi said Golkar could have lost the election if May 29 had been made a holiday and employees could have voted at home.
"Employees would have felt free to vote for other contestants (instead of Golkar) in their areas," Arbi said.
By having to vote in polling booths close to their offices, employees were "burdened," he said; they feared their votes would be known by superiors, which would affect their position at work.
Arbi said Golkar's high gains in North and West Jakarta reflected the presence of strong industrial and business communities there.
Paulus said that people who did not vote did so for a variety of reasons.
"Those who chose not to vote to show loyalty to certain figures were irrational," he said, as they were only following others.
But he said those who preferred not to use their right because they had decided they were not attracted to any one of the contestants were "quite rational" and had "high political awareness."
Votes were counted from 12,478 polling booths across the city and 73 booths abroad. The city was still waiting for the results from 35 more polling booths overseas. (ste)