Parties need conditional accord

Parties need conditional accord

The following is the second of two articles on Indonesian
post-election politics written by Yulius P. Hermawan, a lecturer
on international relations at Parahyangan Catholic University and
a researcher at the Parahyangan Center for International Studies
in Bandung, West Java. He is a graduate of the Department of
Politics, Monash University, Australia.

BANDUNG (JP): As there is still uncertainty on who will
govern the country, the role of major parties is now very
important in securing the route to political stability.

What should major parties do to guarantee political stability?
The formation of coalition parties will probably help secure
stability in the near future.

However, if it is hard for major parties to consider the
formation of a coalition party as the best alternative for the
long-term future of Indonesian politics, a conditional bargaining
between eligible parties may be one alternative which could help
build a new political platform as well as political stability.

Conditional bargaining is a common phenomenon in a new
democracy. It is necessary since there is no clear-cut rule in
securing stable competition among independent parties, while the
result of competition is unpredictable. Rational compromise among
parties are then necessary to form a certain stable system which
may guarantee an order.

This must be built on an assumption that all parties are
responsible for establishing a new political platform on which
democracy will really take place. In return for responsibility,
the platform will benefit them in the future, giving all
partisans the same chance to hold power.

The conditional bargaining among parties will produce an
alliance which encourages parties to achieve goals -- to seek
office as well as to pursue certain policies. It may encourage
parties to form a collective leadership if parties consider a
coalition government as a necessary condition. Sharing the
governmental office would be a good alternative condition. As
part of the coalition government, each party would have to
support the initiatives of the leading party under acceptable
conditions. However, the coalition government does not
necessarily mean that parties should be engaged to form a
coalition party under one banner. Each party is still an
independent organization which has the same chance to win the
next public competition.

There are two crucial dimensions which all partisans should
consider to participate in conditional bargaining.

The first dimension is the quest for acknowledging the
significance of the general election for the birth of a new
credible leadership. All party leaders should respect the general
election as the most acceptable reference to the people's
collective choice. They should recognize the decision on new
leadership should consider the popular mandate given through the
general election. Any decision reached in the MPR should be in
accordance with the popular mandate. It is very important because
eligible voters will finally accept the new leadership so long as
the MPR considers the collective choice was shown in a fair and
honest election.

This dimension will bring some crucial consequences. There
should be a general agreement among parties on the superiority of
a certain party. Whoever gets the most respectable number of
votes will hold political superiority in leading the formation of
a new government. The other parties will not force or hinder the
superior party to call for alliance with some parties to form the
government.

Parties which lost in the last election should respect the
conditional superiority to produce decisions, in return for a
political guarantee that they may take over the government
through the next public competition and, hence, may produce
decisions in the future if they win the competition. Any
candidate whose party failed to win superiority should agree that
their candidacy will lack legitimacy. The last point will lead
those candidates to reconsider their ambitions to be elected and
to perform rationally in the decision-making processes.

Secondly, all parties should accept that the main task of the
new regime is to put out clear-cut fundamentals of the Indonesian
political system. The system needs to transform into somewhat of
an establishment. According to the Constitution, Indonesia adopts
the presidential system. However, the past regime rejected the
classical theory of democracy where people directly elected a
leader (president).

Meanwhile, past leaders were also reluctant to claim that
Indonesia adopts a liberal democracy where eligible voters held a
determinant right to elect representatives who would be
responsible for generating substantially superior decisions
through an intensively open debate among themselves. The last
election gives simple, but good lessons about difficulties on how
to elect legitimate leadership due to the unclear principles of
the system.

The new regime will also have a necessary task to solve the
economic crisis, to correct the wrongdoings of the past regime
and to conduct law reforms. To complete those responsibilities,
the new leadership needs the support of all the components of the
new system.

This condition will encourage both the executive and the
legislative institutions to cross their fingers in order to set
new principles of the system and to complete all necessary tasks.
The two will hold the same significant function in generating the
new platform which will benefit all partisans and people. There
are many challengers which are attempting to hinder the reform
process. This will call parties which have similar perspectives
on the reform to intensify cooperation and to make reform
possible.

Overall, Indonesian politics will really depend on the role of
parties and whether they can perform as rational agents to
establish and secure the route to stable reform.

This general election brought about optimism among people for
the birth of a true democracy. They believe the winds of change
have blown into Indonesia. The widespread enthusiasm among
eligible voters to cast votes in the polls have proven that all
people are waiting for the birth of new leadership.

As democracy will make the state more responsive to the wishes
of the people and give them opportunity to change rulers if they
so desire, political parties should function as agents whose
primary task is to make the state more responsible to public
demands. They should perform as connecting agents between the
state and the people. There comes a moment when new
representatives have to prove their responses to the wishes of
the people.