Megawati loses chair but not stature

The recent controversial congress of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI) in Medan effectively bulldozed Megawati Soekarnoputri from the chairmanship, but political analyst Riswandha Imawan believes she is rising in stature.

YOGYAKARTA (JP): The common assumption that the recent Indonesian Democratic Party congress in Medan was nothing less than the beginning of a bigger disaster seems to hold some credence.

The government-sponsored congress managed to unseat the party's chairperson Megawati Soekarnoputri. But her stature has since grown both in terms of leadership charisma and in the power to win more people to her cause.

The congress has helped launch a new political force in Indonesia. No longer does Megawati belong solely to the party. She has captured the hearts of those outside the party as well. People who are not satisfied with today's monolithic political mechanism, including individuals ostracized by those within the circle of power as a result of increasingly "personalized" politics.

This is obvious from the numerous street protests in the provinces against the results of the Medan congress. The protesters comprise not only die-hard Megawati supporters but free riders as well. The free riders are those who need a basis in the masses to promote their ideas of reform. They look upon the recent congress as a clash between a new undercurrent of political will and the solid wall of power.

It is interesting to note that the protests received overwhelming support from young people, mainly university students. Do these students sympathize with the party?

The fact they took part in the marches and demonstrations does not necessarily mean these young people are all party members. The unit of analysis of democracy is the individual, not the group.

Moreover, democracy does not recognize the formal boundaries of an organization since it works on a spiritual level. In other words, a person need not be a member of the party to have a democratic spirit. This spirit can be equally shared by a person who is a member of the ruling Golkar political grouping, the United Development Party, or even the Armed Forces.

A more critical society understands that the process toward achieving a goal is important in a democracy. It is not merely a question of attaining the objective. A goal can be achieved but perhaps not through a democratic way. Democracy needs tolerance because the crux of a democratic process lies in consensus, in the endeavor to resolve a conflict. Hence all contending sides must sit at a table in equal positions.

The youths know very well the substantial values of democracy. They did not see them in the recent congress. The congress had only one single objective: to topple Megawati. This was done on the pretext of the wider context of an attempt to consolidate the party.

The fact that the congress was closed two days earlier than scheduled is proof of this argument. The congress was clearly meant to reinstate former chairman Soerjadi who was defeated by Megawati in a 1993 congress.

More proof is found in the fact that the recent Medan congress also annulled various party decisions made by Megawati, including the 1993 statutes and regulations. Those of 1986 were reinstated.

The congress also revoked Megawati's dismissal of 16 pro- congress members of the executive board and decision No.043/1994 which the congress perceived as the cause of the rift within the party's East Java branch.

Frankly speaking, Soerjadi excels in leadership qualities compared to those of the party's leadership elite, but democracy never makes a case out of quality. What matters is the quantity of support. Hence, the party might have members of good quality but they do not become part of the elite because they fail to garner enough support.

The crux of the matter is, however, that the way in which Soerjadi was elected was not democratic. First, Megawati was recognized de jure leader at the national conference on Dec. 22 and Dec. 23, 1993 which was in follow up to the Dec. 2 to Dec. 6, 1993 extraordinary congress in which Megawati was elected de facto leader.

Although Megawati's de jure election was done during a national conference, the party members pronounced the conference to be on a par with a congress. So, Megawati's position is no weaker than Soerjadi's. Based on the party's statutes and regulations, her power will end in 1998. The recent congress was held just two-and-a-half years after Megawati's election.

Second, according to the party statutes and regulations of both 1986 and 1993, any congress must be attended by branch representatives. For that purpose, branch conferences and provincial conferences are held prior to any congress. So, the legality of the Medan congress is very doubtful.

Third, Megawati was not invited to account for her policies in front of the congress. The congress in Medan was no other than a unilateral trial for Megawati. This makes it very remote from the basic values of a democratic political life.

Youths and students say that the PDI congress in Medan was a coup d'etat in relationship to Megawati's power. It is the worst political lesson they could ever have learned, namely that a coup is the most effective means of replacing a person in power in Indonesia.

Perhaps they also came to the realization that even the deposing of president Sukarno in the mid 1960s was not as harsh as the political maneuvering of today. President Sukarno was asked to account for his leadership in the Provisional People's Consultative Assembly in 1967 and was rejected. Only then did the presidential election process start.

The toppling of Megawati reflects the deterioration of political ethics among the elite circles of power. This method is not in line with the policy of the New Order as it has come to be understood. It is a step 30 to 50 years backwards.

The writer is a lecturer of political science at Gadjah Mada University, Yogyakarta.