Post-poll thoughts

Post-poll thoughts

Yesterday's announcement of the final general election results
not only carries the message that a great national task has been
accomplished and the status quo preserved, it also acts as a
lesson for those who aspire to a better future for the nation.

The willingness to learn from experience does not mean
repentance, as criticism and social control are no synonyms for
efforts to unseat the incumbent. Criticism and protest should be
understood as the desire for change from the grassroots in the
absence of a chance for the people to censure the government,
much less to replace it with another political force.

The recent general election was marred by riots and protests,
indicating people's greater courage to express their political
aspirations and make their voices heard. The grassroots, from
various cultural and religious backgrounds, took the opportunity
to support the non-government political entity -- as the word
opposition is taboo here -- in noisy street rallies.

The people's judgment was also telling in the tragic failure
of the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI), whose recognized
leadership most people consider a mere extension of the
authorities' political dominance.

The convoys, which in many areas descended into riots, were
not limited to cities but also took place in small towns. The
people, after witnessing five polls since the birth of the New
Order government, clearly said they wanted a cleaner and more
transparent general election and to be given a greater freedom of
choice.

The government denied giving the United Development Party
(PPP) and PDI access to the computerized electoral results on
financial grounds. This was difficult for people to accept
considering the importance of the nation's "festival of
democracy", as election campaigns are dubbed.

Another characteristic of the polls was PPP's and PDI's
protests against what they claimed were irregularities and
manipulations of the voting process by election officials, who
consisted only of government officials. The government's promise
to process this year's protests through legal means remains to be
realized.

In this age of sophisticated communications technology, the
people have been told that although democracy has several
aliases, its acceptable standard is the same everywhere -- the
freedom to exercise their right to choose. The people also want
to see the polls end like those in other democratic countries
where the losers accept defeat and congratulate the winner. One
example of this was in Iran, a country which has not completely
recovered from revolution. The people of Iran were happy to see a
presidential candidate, whom the ruling elite did not support,
win and everyone promised him support.

But after Golkar's landslide victory and the rise of PPP as a
check-and-balance power in the House of Representatives, is there
any possibility of significant change in the political system and
the law on general elections? Is there any way the quality of our
process can be improved?

For the sake of the nation's future and with the new trend
among nations to criticize the absence of political freedom in
mind, Golkar should move forward to sponsor the changes. One does
not live on bread alone.