New blood, new hope

As many as 75 new Jakarta councillors were sworn in on Wednesday -- mostly new faces -- with the largest faction, the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), occupying 18 seats.

The Democratic Party holds 16 seats, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) 11 seats, Golkar seven, and the United Development Party (PPP) and National Mandate Party (PAN) six seats each. The Prosperous Peace Party (PDS) and the National Awakening Party (PKB) each have four seats and the Reform Star Party (PBR), three seats on the City Council.

Apart from the distribution of seats, at least two things are worth noting about the new council. First, the councillors were elected in April by their constituents through a new election system.

But the contradiction is that political parties are still authorized to recall representatives from the council, should their stance be perceived as contrary to the party's policy. This means councillors are fully dependent on and responsible to their parties -- not their constituents.

Second, the swearing in of the new councillors occurred amid protests by non-governmental organizations and party- affiliated groups calling for clean governance. Those protests should be seen as a warning, as they are the voice of the people, who have long been yearning for clean and good governance.

Wardah Hafidz of the Urban Poor Consortium, and a staunch critic of Governor Sutiyoso, warned at Wednesday's demonstration that the new councillors must not involve themselves in the practices of collusion, corruption and nepotism.

Surely, city residents hope the new councillors will respond to their needs, rather than acting as the rubber stamp of the executive.

It is apparent that high expectations are placed on the PKS, which prioritized clean governance in its campaign. The PKS won the hearts of Jakartans by making the timely and attractive offer that their members would purge the council of unscrupulous and corrupt politicians.

While many councillors in other provinces have been accused of violations, no one has been able to legally prove that past members of Jakarta's council were corrupt. At the same time, however, no one can deny that many councillors failed to act for the public's benefit.

It may be recalled that, many times, the council stood by while controversial development programs were implemented. The administration's notorious decision to reclaim Jakarta's northern coast can be cited as one example of the council's failure to control the executive. The city administration's failure to preserve open spaces and green areas is another issue, which the council should have properly addressed.

The no-reserves acceptance of the governor's annual accountability report, including the report on the use of the city budget, is further evidence of the councillors' uncritical disposition.

It seems that Jakarta's councillors -- as was true of many councillors in most other provinces -- were busy looking after their own affairs and businesses, ignoring their main duty to represent the people.

We suggest that, to avoid disappointment, Jakarta's residents be more realistic. Although, the public has the right to monitor and control the councillors' performance.

For the new councillors, a noble challenge lies ahead, which is to practice good governance and build a better civil society. This no small challenge, particularly as Jakarta is seen by other areas of this vast archipelago as a barometer of progress and a example to follow.