Lessons from the first direct presidential election

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).