Learning from Pekalongan

On Sunday, April 6, renewed rioting hit the town of Pekalongan. Earlier riots occurred in the same town from March 24 to March 26. The case of Pekalongan is noteworthy because it was clearly linked to the upcoming general election, and should teach us a few useful things.

First, rivalry between election contestants, unless properly supervised, can lead to disturbances. Second, displays of arrogance by any of the contestants -- but especially those who feel that they are strong -- can cause serious problems. Removing the banners of another contestant while ignoring the accepted norms of civil conduct is one example of such arrogance. Painting objects the color of one's own party, or engaging in a "war of colors", is yet another example.

Third, limiting mass political activities is not always productive and does not necessarily ensure smooth elections. Fourth, any political contests and maneuvers held by any of the contestants should take into consideration the locally prevailing cultural, social and political conditions. Fifth, we should constantly keep in mind that general elections are not ends in themselves. They are merely means to improve political life.

Finally, the unrest in Pekalongan can be a useful means of introspection and for measuring our readiness to engage in and to manage political competition. We do indeed have enough experience in holding elections. We are also quite experienced in controlling unrest during general elections -- the incident at Lapangan Banteng, Jakarta, in 1982 is an example -- but in the past three decades we have shown that we do not have enough experience in engaging in and managing fair political competition.

The case of Pekalongan should encourage us to learn how to compete fairly. Only by learning to do so can we hope to attain democratic maturity.

-- Republika, Jakarta