Stop election process of Jakarta governor

Azas Tigor Nainggolan, Chairperson, Jakarta Residents Forum (FAKTA)

Apart from being a province Jakarta is the country's capital, and so it should serve as an example for other cities regarding policies or development programs. However, the example so far displayed by Jakarta has been far from exemplary. In politics, social, economic and cultural aspects, Jakarta has set a misleading example. Its policies and programs have sided with the few and tend to be against the poor. There is little space for democracy. Jakarta today belongs to the powerful and the rich, the latest evidence being the ongoing process of the election for governor.

The process, which now involves seven pairs of candidates for governor and deputy, has disappointed many Jakartans. Since the beginning of entire process, the city council did not issue clear rules of the game. What it provided was no better than the rules to elect a neighborhood chief. This is because the process has lacked transparency and tends to involve collusion.

There have been several violations of the council's own rules. Candidates running for governor became candidates for deputy governor, such as Fauzi Bowo and Abdillah Toha; the time for registration of candidates was extended because of pressure from a certain party, administrative violations and the council's decisions on candidates for governor and deputy governor, made at inquorate meetings.

The criteria for screening candidates were unclear and the process was not made public. The election committee revealed a number of inconsistencies, including the above extension of the registration period of candidates. Then a number of figures who are suspected of abuse of power made it through the screening: The incumbent, Sutiyoso, who was Jakarta military commander at the time of the violent attack on the headquarters of the Indonesian Democratic Party in July 1996; and Tarmidi, who is suspected of manipulating official notices that enabled councillors to conduct comparison studies abroad (the "Ancolgate" scandal).

It's easy to imagine the bleak destiny of this city if one of these people becomes our governor. Meanwhile none of the people's choice made it through the candidate screening.

This shows that our councillors support Sutiyoso's political ambition to become Jakarta governor for a second time.

The Council has continued to ignore all the feedback from the public. It is clearly not the people whom they represent, but political parties and other powerful groups. Forgetting the "public interest", which comes up unfailingly in its rhetoric, the Council has failed to resist intervention from government parties or owners of capital with political or economic interests. The election has become an absurd parody of itself and even ordinary people know that "money politics" is behind it.

The play became even more absurd when it was time to decide on a secret ballot in the election. To fight for their candidates councillors who were either for or against Sutiyoso drew up the election rules. They fussed over technicalities such as whether to write candidates' names, tick them or pierce the names on ballot papers. Their arguments ended in deadlock. Those opposed to Sutiyoso insisted on ticking or piercing candidates' names, to avoid "money politics" subverting the election. This possibility has been admitted by a number of councillors.

The tension over the technicalities revealed clearly that the representatives were far removed from the real interests of Jakartans. They should have been tirelessly debating how to elect a governor and deputy who met the wishes of the public, whose integrity was unquestioned and who was not a human rights violator.

To avoid further mistakes the legislative council must cancel the whole process. New, clear rules must be drawn on the election regarding the mechanism, which should involve active participation from all elements of society. This would mean a direct election, through which people would be able to make independent judgments and vote for those whom they thought best could lead Jakarta.

Direct elections would involve a number of stages: First, stop the current elections; second, have Sutiyoso resign instead of extending his term or supporting him for another term on the grounds of maintaining the city's security. Jakarta under Sutiyoso been neither secure nor a pleasant place to live for its residents.

Third, appoint a caretaker to prepare direct elections to be held by mid-2003; the caretaker should also continue the tasks of the governor. Fourth, make amendments to all legal instruments related to the election process. These are the law on regional autonomy and law no. 34/1999 on Jakarta as the capital, particularly its clauses on the head of the administration.

By 2003 we should have a governor who is not an authoritarian ruler. A leader who responds to the aspirations of his city and has good managerial ability. A city is not a dead thing like a machine to be operated according to the whims of its operator. Acquiring such a leader is only possible if the participation of its residents is closely involved in the creative process of the city's development.