People must vote popular leader

Wimar Witoelar is right in his Insight column article that voters feel confusion about coalitions (Coalition a victory for people's power, June 15, 1999). But more importantly, they also feel frustration that the votes they cast so enthusiastically are being turned into commodities in elite power games reminiscent of the Soeharto era.

It is worth recalling that the New Order regime had no democratic foundation. The foundation was violence, military power and elite politics, to which elections were a mere embellishment.

When Soeharto fell, it was immediately recognized that the post-Soeharto government should have a democratic foundation. But there is a danger that the foundation will again be military power and elite politics with the elections only an embellishment.

For 12 months we have been told how essential the elections are. Millions of words have been expended explaining that the elections will show which leaders have democratic legitimacy and credibility. The people have been consulted and the answer from the ballot box is loud and clear. The Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) is by far the most popular party and Megawati Soekarnoputri is the most popular leader, with nearly twice as many votes as Golkar and more votes than the National Awakening Party, the National Mandate Party and the United Development Party put together.

But many in the establishment, and even the media, pretend that the results are a big accident. One TVRI presenter suggested that viewers might be alarmed by the lead held by PDI Perjuangan. She presented two political scientists who "reassured" the public that votes in South Sulawesi are worth twice as many seats as votes in Central Java, so actually Golkar will still have plenty of seats. Acolytes of Habibie and Golkar remind us that the election is only one stage in a process. Later the wise men of the People's Consultative Assembly will decide constitutionally and legitimately whether the president will be the person the people have indicated or someone of their own choosing.

But in democratic terms, it hardly makes sense to choose a leader whose party has won only 10 percent at the ballot box. It makes still less sense to choose an outside leader whose popularity has never been proven. And it makes least sense of all to choose a candidate whose party has lost two-thirds of its voters and only retained others through the pervasive fear and corruption which is its trademark.

JOHN HARGREAVES

Jakarta