Lessons from the first direct presidential election

Jusuf Wanandi

Indonesia has had a successful first direct presidential election. The process of the elections was beyond expectations: fair, peaceful, and democratic. The people participated enthusiastically because they believe that the elections can make a real difference to their lives.

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono or SBY has come out as the winner, and convincingly so as he has gained about 22 percent more votes than his competitor, Megawati. The outcome of this election suggests a number of important things.

First, it clearly means that the role of the political parties and social leaders is much less important in a direct presidential election than in the parliamentary election. The grand coalition between Golkar and PDI-P was also a big disappointment. They both experience serious internal rifts and were unable to project a new image and provide assurance that they can manage the country, despite the efforts of Golkar's Chairman Akbar Tandjung, which might be too little and too late.

Second, and perhaps more importantly, it shows that the general public wants to see change. A sizeable proportion of the voters that felt being left behind following the financial crisis appear to be very unhappy with the status quo. They have become impatient as they continue to suffer. If about 30 to 40 million people are unemployed or underemployed, they will understandably vote out the incumbent that has not been able to provide jobs for them. To demonstrate their sovereign right, the voters really see that they now have the opportunity to change. Susilo simply represents change. The voters have exercised this right. It needs to be noted that they no longer have political loyalties and really look at results. This is essentially what was implied in the concept of "floating mass", proposed more than 30 years ago.

Third, television is playing an increasing role in influencing and educating people, even in the most remote parts of the country. The last 20 years saw remarkable penetration of television. The people now have access to alternative views and ideas and are no longer dependent on those espoused by local political parties or social leaders. Television is also a powerful media to project images. SBY's popularity is largely due to his coverage on television. He has been able to make the most of it from the time that he was a coordinating minister in Megawati's cabinet. In contrast, Megawati failed to make use of it because of her minimal public exposure.

Fourth, public opinion polls also may have an influence on voters' behavior. As such polls are able to make rather accurate predictions in the April parliamentary elections. They might have had an impact on the outcome of the presidential election. SBY's lead in the polls after the first round could have had a bandwagon effect that was very much in his favor. The impact of polls on the outcome of elections has led to questions about the need to put some limitations on foreign participation in conducting such polls. Partisanship of some polling organizations has also been raised. What could best be done is not to allow results of opinion polls be announced at least one week before the election is held.

Fifth, and perhaps the most important factor determining the outcome of the presidential election, was Megawati's unwillingness or incapability to show to the people that she is willing to change her style of governance and to bring in new people.

Those who were opposed to SBY/Kalla or were still undecided had been waiting for those signs. Even many of her supporters were uncomfortable with the thought of another five years without change. On the other hand, rightly or wrongly, Susilo is seen as the candidate for change. His popularity began to rise when he was seen as the underdog. In the end, his image as a leader who wants to see things happen was perhaps the most powerful factor. Essentially, people want a pro-active leader that can deliver and not a president that is only a symbol.

The beauty of the process is that the people have spoken. They may find out that much of their expectations will not be fulfilled by the new government. Indeed, Susilo will be faced with enormous challenges. For now, the new leadership should be given the benefit of the doubt. Various reservations and concerns about their ideas and leadership have been aired, and hopefully they will take them into consideration.

The democratic process of leadership change is only one aspect of a democratic system of governance. This system can be strengthened only if political parties are consolidated and strong. The country cannot afford to see the disintegration of the two largest political parties, Golkar and PDI-P. They should be consolidated so that they can play a constructive role as an opposition in a system of healthy checks and balances.

The writer is co-founder, and member, Board of Trustees, Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS).