Power to the status quo

The major political parties, many of which were born of the Reformation Movement in 1998, have established the status quo and are now seeking to preserve their power to the exclusion, inasmuch as possible, of potential newcomers: This much is clear from the Bill on Political Parties that was endorsed unanimously by all nine factions of the House of Representatives last week.

The major factions have cut a sweet deal among themselves by ensuring that actual sovereignty falls into their hands, particularly the hands of the powerful party bosses, and not in the hands of the rank-and-files, let alone the electorate.

The bill also ensures that political parties will remain Jakarta-centric, which runs counter to the spirit of greater autonomy for the regions. It restricts any debate about constitutional reforms, and leaves absolutely no room for debate about alternative forms of government, like federalism, which in 1998 briefly spawned a healthy discourse among politicians.

Where control is lax is in party financing, which once again opens the possibility of money politics in determining the outcome of the 2004 general elections.

In many respects, our democracy will suffer a setback if President Megawati Soekarnoputri signs the Bill on Political Parties into law. Since her Cabinet and her Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI Perjuangan) were instrumental in drafting and ensuring the passage of the bill in the House, it would be a miracle if the President decided against signing the bill.

Besides, the nation is now pressed for time in preparing for the general elections in 2004. With all its shortcomings, this bill will have to do as part of the electorate laws allowing the nation to make logistic preparations in time for 2004. Three other legislations are still in the pipelines: the Bill on General Election, the Bill on Direct Presidential Election, and the Bill on the Composition of the House of Representatives.

The Bill on Political Parties requires a political party to be represented in at least half of all provinces in the country (currently 30, but more in the pipeline), and in half of the regencies/mayoralties in the provinces where it is represented.

This seems like a necessity in order to control the number of parties in the country. At last count, the government reported that nearly 200 political parties have registered with the Ministry of Home Affairs. Meeting the criteria, however, does not guarantee an automatic right to contest the 2004 elections, and the Bill on General Elections seeks to impose even more stringent criteria.

While some restrictions are necessary, they should not hamper the emergence of political parties offering alternatives to the policies put forth by the major, status quo parties. Going by the meager performance of the parties represented in the House, this country definitely needs new political alternatives.

The bill also stipulates that the political parties not only have the right to nominate their own candidates to run for elected offices, but also the right to remove them from office even after the candidates have been elected by the people. This power to recall the elected officials runs counter to the constitutional spirit of giving sovereignty to the people.

Meanwhile, the requirement that a party must have its headquarters in Jakarta effectively supports the concentration of political power in the capital, when the present need is to devolve power, particularly political power, away from the center.

This and the clause that parties must not threaten the unitary state of Indonesia in their activities also effectively rules out the emergence of regionally based political parties seeking to promote interests and causes particular to their regions.

Ironically, a political party may be formed on the basis of shared religion, race or ideology, but never on the basis of shared geographical, or regional, interests. All these issues possess equal potential of becoming explosive. If anything, though, religion, race and ideological issues are potentially more divisive than regional causes.

A two-party system is the most ideal, if not practical, for a functioning and stable democracy such as that practiced in the United States and most other advanced countries. One party represents the conservative elements in society, and another the more liberal and progressive elements. These parties take turns in government depending on the mood of the people.

As an emerging democracy, Indonesia has not reached that ideal sophistication necessary for a two-party system. In fact, given the diversity of the people, and considering the failure of the existing major political parties in representing the diverse interests of the people, then simplifying and rationalizing the number of political parties should not even be contemplated.

Instead, voters in this country should be given wider choices in 2004, not fewer. Sadly, the factions ruling the House of Representatives have conspired, through the Bill on Political Parties, to deprive us of that privilege.