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.