Prospectsfor the Islamic party in the elections

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.