Prospectsfor the Islamic party in the elections

Muhammad Qodari, Director of Research, Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI)
Jakarta, qodari@lsi.or.id

Apart from the Concern for the Nation Functional Party (PKPB), another new political party which has attracted attention is the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS). People interested in PKS are not just Indonesian voters, but foreign journalists and observers as well. My recent interviews with media such as Singapore's The Straits Times and Radio Australia illustrate this interest.

Many people find PKPB attractive because the party will likely nominate Soeharto's eldest daughter, Siti Hardijanti "Tutut" Rukmana, as its presidential candidate. It also promises to bring back the New Order system. While in the case of PKS, people seem interested for three main reasons: first, its reputation as a party which is free from corruption scandals, second, its prospects in 2004, and third, its agenda as an Islamic political party.

It is generally accepted that the country is troubled. Most people would agree that the main cause of this condition is corruption. The practice of corruption, which was widespread during the New Order regime, is believed to be one of the forces behind the reformasi (reform movement) of 1998. However, widespread corruption in the country has outlasted the fifth anniversary of reformasi. New parties in power, the National Awakening Party led by former president Abdurrahman Wahid and the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) led by current President Megawati Soekarnoputri, are considered to have failed in the fight against corruption.

Other dominant parties in power have also failed. People might not have had much faith in Golkar Party, Soeharto's former political machine, or the United Development Party (PPP), another party established during Soeharto's rule. But they did hope that the National Mandate Party (PAN) led by the "locomotive" of reformasi Amien Rais, and the Crescent Star Party (PBB) led by law professor Yusril Ihza Mahendra, would succeed. PAN and PBB officials may say anything to defend their reputations. Nonetheless, the only party widely acclaimed by the public to be corruption-free is the Justice Party (PK).

PK was a small party with seven seats in the House of Representatives (DPR). It won 1.436.565 votes or 1.4 percent of the votes in the 1999 elections. This meant that PK failed to meet the electoral threshold of 2 percent of votes in order to be able to participate in the 2004 elections. With PK's limited number of seats in the House it managed to uphold its image as an "anticorruption party". PKS claims that its members -- at national and local levels of government -- had declined attempted bribes worth Rp 5,3 billion, and had prevented the misuse of a total of Rp 739,6 billion in funds from the state budget.

With its reputation as a clean party, many are convinced that Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) -- the new party established to replace PK -- is going to win a significant number of votes in the coming legislative election. This confidence is supported by the other fact that PKS is among the few political parties that have a comprehensive campaign. Banners, posters, and flyers from PKS are seen across the country -- while, in 1999, PK was only salient in Jakarta. PKS ads also appear on television quite frequently. Such ads are vital as television is the main source of political information for Indonesian voters.

Results of national surveys conducted by the Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI) in November 2003 show that PKS may win 2.5 percent of the votes, which is already better than its 1999 achievement. A tracking survey by the International Foundation for Electoral Systems (IFES) shows a gradual increase in PKS's popularity, as it is considered by an increasing number of respondents to be the party which best represents their aspirations. The percentage was 3.6 in January and 4.1 percent in February. As voters will cast their ballots on April 5, it is reasonable to assume that PKS may win around 5 percent of the votes. Why can PKS not garner a larger number of votes, say 10 or 15 percent?

Two explanations can be presented here. First, PKS is only known to the minority of voters. According to an LSI survey in November, 35 percent of voters are familiar with the party. Having to change its name was a major disadvantage. People who were previously familiar with PK do not automatically assimilate it with PKS. Second, the issue deemed most important by the people is not corruption but the economy. According to the above LSI survey, corruption is regarded as the most important problem by 5 percent of the voters. That is why, the party that may win the most votes is the one deemed the most capable of solving economic problems -- which is Golkar.

Based on its past and current performance, I believe that PKS has the most potential among the Islamic political parties here. It has all the elements that it needs to grow: Self discipline, a solid body of supporters, and a clean image. However, based on votes obtained by PK in 1999, and votes projected for PKS in 2004, its growth will be gradual. Ceteris paribus, PKS may become one of the biggest parties -- with more than 20 percent of the votes -- after only three or four more elections.

Another reason why PKS would be able to grow while other Islamic parties remain stagnant or even shrink (in term of votes) is that PKS does not explicitly fight for Islamic causes by promising the implementation of sharia (Islamic law).

What PKS promotes is that as an Islamic party it will be amanah (trusteeship) in keeping its promise, which is to be "clean" and truthful. This universal message is more acceptable to Muslims voters, who may not be against the implementation of sharia but do not see the implementation of sharia as a priority -- which they are willing to fight for.

It is also more acceptable to Muslims voters who are against the implementation of sharia because they believe it is not a "correct" interpretation of Islam. By doing this, PKS has widened its potential constituency, while other Islamic party have done the contrary.

Regarding the future agenda of PKS, I have often been asked: Will PKS apply the implementation of sharia when it is in power? I am not a PKS official, just a keen observer of the party since before its inception. Considering ideas carried out by prominent figures who become the models for PKS activists, such as Hassan Al Banna and Sayyid Quthb, the implementation of sharia is possible.

However, taking into account that PKS must accommodate the needs and characteristics of the majority of Muslim voters in order to grow, it is more likely that PKS will adjust its platform and policies to suit the voters in this country of moderate Muslims. Changing its rhetoric, policies or platform to be more explicitly Islamist will risk votes for the party. Among many uncertainties in politics, there is one thing that I am very certain of: No party is willing to loose votes.