New blood, new hope
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.