No change without youth

Max Lane, Visiting Fellow, Center for Asia Pacific Social Transformation Studies, University of Wollongong, New South Wales, Australia

First president Sukarno was 27 when he became chairperson of the Indonesian National Party (PNI) in the 1930s. Mohammad Hatta was of a similar age when he took over the leadership of the PNI a little later. Sukarno and Hatta were the central figures of the independence movement when they were in their 20s. The mass of Indonesians were ready for them to lead an independent Indonesia even when they were that age.

Of course, they were older, in their early 40s, when they did assume leadership of an independent Indonesia in 1945. But they were acceptable as leaders long before that. It was repression by the Dutch colonial powers exiling Sukarno, Hatta and other figures that delayed their assumption of the nation's leadership.

Both before the Aug. 17, 1945 proclamation of independence, during the guerrilla and diplomatic struggle of 1945-1949, and during the next 16 years of nation building, young people provided the energy and the spirit (semangat) that ensured advances in the struggles of the people.

The word semangat took on a special weight in the new political culture. There was a strong consciousness that society could advance only by struggle, by the mobilization of the energies of the mass of ordinary people in achieving the goals of independence and then nation building.

The role of youth and spirit was further symbolized when the then older Sukarno and Hatta were kidnapped by younger members of the independence movement a few days before the official proclamation of Aug. 17, when Sukarno and Hatta hesitated to proclaim independence.

Even during the feudal period, it was extremely young figures that brought major change. Ken Arok was 20 when he overthrew slavery under Tunggul Ametung in Java and confronted the empire of Kediri.

Thirty years of New Order politics appears, however, to have obliterated any recognition of the energy, vitality and most importantly, ideas and analysis, that youth can provide in political leadership. In fact, the political culture created during the New Order and still prevailing today seems to turn completely against all the best traditions of Indonesian history.

Today, to stand for the position of President of Indonesia, an individual must virtually be over 40 years of age. Apart from being a clear violation of the democratic rights of any citizen under the age of 40, this provision eliminates from candidacy some of the most dynamic figures in Indonesian society and politics.

It also rejects any leadership from a sector of the population that comprises more than 70 percent of the population. Furthermore, it has been this sector of society, especially represented by students, that have been motor for change during the last four decades. Every wave of reform since 1972 has been driven by the student movement. A prominent figure, such as the labor leader Dita Sari, who has won international recognition as a trade union and women's leader, could not stand as a candidate for president.

Even for the position of governor there is age discrimination. To be a governor, a candidate must be 30 years of age as required by City Council. One important political outcome of the student opposition to the Soeharto regime during the 1990s was the formation of the Peoples Democratic Party (PRD), a small party, but one that has also won respect for its consistency on democratic issues. The PRD considered putting forward a candidate for the position of Jakarta governor up against former military commander of Jakarta during the Soeharto period, Sutiyoso. They selected woman student leader, Zelly Ariane, who had led some of the mass actions in Sumedang and Bandung against Golkar during the presidency of Abdurrahman Wahid. She was later elected to head the PRD in the Jakarta area. But she could not proceed with her registration as a candidate; she is only 22.

The discrimination against age goes beyond the laws on candidacy for President and governor. During the New Order the whole phenomenon of the rebelliousness and energy of youth, of semangat, was suppressed. Within the repressive, corruption driven, highly bureaucratized and feudalistic New Order political culture, active young people were patronizingly referred to as children. One often hears phrases like: Anak-anak LBH (Legal Aid Office), anak-anak mahasiswa and so on.

During the struggle for independence and for nation building , active young people struggling for change were never referred to as anak-anak. Then they were pemuda, which literally means youth, but inferring that they are at the forefront of struggle and change. The word pemuda resonated actual political power. The national revolution is often referred to as the revolusi pemuda.

Now pemuda are "children". Sometimes when these new pemuda, the student leaders and organizers of the 1990s, gain popularity, the now over 40 political elite that monopolizes politics, may refer to them with a phrase like "good, idealistic children". But the inference is always that they are not really mature. In fact, there is often the implication that maturity means surrendering spirit and idealism.

Even within prodemocracy circles, among non-governmental organizations and so on, this prejudice can exist. Activists denigrate the PRD, for example, because it is a "student party" with nobody "of any age" in its leadership. And generally there is a deference to the more aged political elite even while at the same time attacking this same elite as being politically and intellectually bankrupt.

At this time in Indonesian history, if any discrimination is necessary, it should be against those who are over 40. The campaign today for democratic and social reform, for reformasi or reformasi total, is almost entirely an effort by people under 40, with just a few special exceptions. Reformasi is a project of those sections of society free of the New Order political culture; and this means, more or less, people under 40.

How can reformasi possibly take place if those who are its energy are excluded from the top leadership positions of the government and are not the dominant force in the legislature? How can there possibly be reformasi until at least 70 percent of legislators are under 40?

Society should be on the look-out for "student parties" or youth parties, rather than looking down upon them.

In the end, the formal discrimination against youth is a measure to protect the political dominance of the New Order generation. Of course, there are people over 40 who fought against Soeharto. And there are people under 40 who still have a New Order mentality. But the reality is that reformasi is an idea from the youth, was fought for by the youth, and it was youth that paid the supreme sacrifice such as at the Trisakti shooting in May 1998.

The spirit of the youth (semangat pemuda) won the end of the New Order more than anything else. But it appears that the current political elite, all coming from the New Order political culture, want to make sure that youth spirit plays no part in leading the nation or governing the country.