Quest for suitable campaign rules

YOGYAKARTA (JP): The United Development Party (PPP) and the Indonesian Democratic Party (PDI) behaved in a predictable manner to the official-set election campaign guidelines -- they made muffled sounds of protest but accepted them.

Golkar dismissed the protests and accepted the regulations completely.

The PPP and PDI have aired basically similar grievances. They doubted the rules would put them on the same foothold with Golkar, which, with great material and human resources at its disposal, has access to voters all year round.

The government eventually made some changes, including lifting a planned ban on political parties campaigning in rural areas. But the PPP and PDI agreed that it was a small concession given that they could not take full advantage of those changes.

"We have no cadres to run our campaigns in villages," PPP's chairman, Ismail Hasan Metareum, said recently. In addition, limited financial and human resources hampered its way.

"How can the PPP and PDI fight against Golkar when we have no chance of introducing our programs to people in villages and remote areas?" he asked then.

The minority parties objections to the rules reflected their doubt that the government -- as the election organizer -- could be impartial and that they would be exempted from discriminatory treatment from the bureaucracy.

This doubt was expressed during the three contestants' meetings in October last year, with the National Council for Defense and Security, which President Soeharto commissioned to draw up the draft guidelines. Representatives of the PPP and PDI struggled to have the rules revised there and then, citing the same reason that Golkar used to accept the guidelines: a quality election.

Their protests failed, as did their subsequent suggestion that open debates be held among the three contestants. Golkar dismissed it.

"We don't need to imitate the election campaigns in liberal countries," Golkar leader Abdul Gafur said as the reason for his party's refusal.

The council's secretary-general, Soekarto, agreed. "The various (missions) that the contending parties offer during the election are not to be debated because each has different concepts to offer. Debates on them would be futile," Soekarto argued.

Some analysts have argued that it is precisely the differences in the political contestants' visions that should be highlighted in order to help voters reach their decisions.

The PPP and PDI had hoped that all of their objections to the campaign rules would be accommodated in the presidential decree, which was issued in December. As it turned out, however, the decree was accompanied by technical directives from the home affairs minister, information minister and from the National Police chief, which reportedly caused PPP and PDI even greater frustration.

There are, of course, proponents for the rules, who see them as more fitting for the more educated and critical public of today. Rhetorics in massive gatherings would not satisfy them as they did in the previous elections.

Election campaigning where dialogs are held and street rallies reduced are deemed more in line with the concept of "campaigning" and is hoped to produce a better quality election.

"Rallies are not campaigning," said Riswandha Imawan, a staff lecturer at the Gadjah Mada University's School of Social and Political Sciences in Yogyakarta.

"Campaigns should be held in order to woo public support, rather than just a gathering of one's supporters," he said.

"Campaigning in the form of dialogs, where audiences and participants are not limited to only one political contestant's supporters, reflects the true sense of campaigning," he said.

Regardless of whether one method of campaigning is more superior than others, most people are certain that Golkar stands to benefit from the reportedly restrictive rules. The dominant grouping is much better prepared than the other parties.

"Golkar is the most prepared for either public rallies or dialogs," Riswandha said. "It has not only plenty of quality campaign speakers but also almost unlimited funds for that purpose."

Besides, he said, Golkar officials -- from the level of cabinet ministers to the lowest level of bureaucracy -- have conducted early electioneering.

Majority

Political observer Amien Rais agreed. "Through various official forums and meetings over the past few years, Golkar has conducted 'disguised' election campaigning," he said. "Everybody knows that if a bureaucracy figure lectures, anywhere and anytime, he or she also brings the voice of Golkar."

He pointed to various detailed directives, including the stipulation to solicit police permission for campaign speakers or for the use of transportation, as contributing to the disadvantages that the PPP and PDI experience.

"Those regulations are strangling the PPP and PDI because their campaign speakers would not be able to express their own aspirations freely," Amien said. He added that such campaigning could not benefit the public, who need to be exposed to novel, promising and more realistic perspectives.

"With such regulations, I doubt we could have heated debates which could eventually convince the public of an issue," he said. "Campaign speeches wouldn't be able to beat the popularity of the television comedy show Srimulat."

Amien speculated that the guidelines were designed to help Golkar retain its majority. Some of the changes made later in the election campaign rules were not essential enough to ensure quality elections, he argued.

Besides, directives that were issued later and at the lower level might not be translated into actions. "Out there in the field, the people in charge of polling booths are bureaucrats wearing the uniform of Korpri (Indonesian Civil Servants Corps), who are, of course, members of Golkar," said Riswandha Imawan.

"So, how can we hope that election campaigning can serve as a public education means, so that our people know enough to exercise their rights to vote?" he said. (team)