The 2004 general electiosn may be impetus for cultural movement

Edi Suhardi, Advisor, Partnership for Governance Reform in Indonesia, Jakarta

The 2004 elections are a new opportunity for leadership and regime change. The general election will be in April, followed by the unprecedented direct presidential election in July. There is an increasing nationwide demand for the eradication of corruption in the forthcoming elections. Meanwhile, to reform political parties is still an elusive task and therefore monitoring the parties' behavior will be crucial. The question is, will the 2004 elections bring about meaningful changes in the nature of governance?

The implications go beyond choosing a new government and legislators. More significantly, this election marks the turning point, toward the decision to choose peaceful cultural reform or cultural revolution.

The new electoral law introduces an open proportional system through which voters are meant to choose both parties and candidates on the polling date, but inconsistently, selecting a candidate is not required. This will not contribute to a more representative government, where legislators are as accountable to constituents as they are to party leaders in Jakarta. And most of us are skeptical about the outcome of the elections.

Opinion polls and analysis all but reveal that the majority of voters will vote along the traditional line, meaning no significant change is perceived for the House of Representatives or the government. The leading candidates for president are either connected to past leaders, or inclined to preserve the advantages of "bad governance" inherited from the past. Many people argue that corruption is part of our culture; thus curbing and preventing corruption should also be dealt with by a cultural movement, one that aims to change values regarding corruption.

Portraits of the 24 political parties are also not promising. Taking into account the establishment process and decision-making mechanism, all parties reflect a very centralized system. No parties evolved from the grass roots, and hence none of them truly represent the aspirations of the people. They are formed and operate to articulate the interests of the elite.

Therefore, the next elections are not too far removed from competition among politicians mostly based in Jakarta. This mirrors another paradox of reform, the disparity between the very centralized political system and the decentralized governance.

The actual results of the elections are uncertain. But the status quo is becoming the certainty and the paradoxical winner of democracy in Indonesia.

Whatever the outcome, the public will demand the immediate improvement of socioeconomic factors and the better delivery of public services. The failure of the government and political parties to address the public's demands, and to understand the core problems and needs of the people, will fuel social upheaval. Symptoms of such are substantial, as shown by the escalation of communal conflicts, political apathy and the loss of public confidence.

Under such a scenario, governance reform will become a commodity of the newly installed government. An agenda of opportunistic reform will become the government's agenda. As observed in the current government, reform has been sporadic and the government's response to the demand for change has been mostly reactive to emerging pressures, rather than a strategic measure. Governance reform is not well institutionalized, either in political parties and the government.

To break the impasse of reform, efforts toward changing people's values are gaining momentum, and are seen as the only breakthrough. This has been demonstrated in the partnership between Nahdlatul Ulama (NU) and Muhammadiyah to work in tandem in combating corruption. Together the two organizations influence more than 80 million people throughout Indonesia, and form the bulwark of moderate Islamic Civil Societies in Indonesia (William Liddle, 2003).

The partnership of NU and Muhammadiyah, launched on Oct. 15, 2003 marked a new era in the fight against corruption. The partnership has set a new precedent with the two powerful moral forces bound by their shared concern of the need to combat corruption. Both organizations also concurred that the elections in 2004 are a critical juncture.

The momentum and atmosphere of the nationwide call for governance reform is brought to the regions through a series of campaigns. These suggest that both NU and Muhammadiyah issue election guides suggesting their followers do not vote for legislative candidates and political parties with "unclean" track records. This common platform for anticorruption and reform exemplifies change in a peaceful fashion -- one that systematically involves efforts to change people's values, and hence, behavior -- a cultural movement.

This initiative has galvanized support from institutions throughout the country. The campaign has drawn backup from various religious groups. The Indonesian Bishops Council (KWI) also urged Catholics to vote for candidates with clean track records, regardless of religious or political affiliation. The Indonesian Communion of Churches (PGI) has demonstrated palpable support of NU-Muhammadiyah initiatives, in combating corruption and money politics ahead of the 2004 elections.

The NU-Muhammadiyah partnership is evidence of the influence of organizations in drumming-up support and solidarity. This is an example that shared concerns, followed by a built common platform are a modality for a well managed cultural movement.

The two organizations have demonstrated their influence in propelling a nationwide cultural movement by working together in combating corruption and ensuring democratic, clean and peaceful elections in 2004. Their initiative has brought a glimmer of hope for a peaceful and massive people-driven reform movement (H.S. Dillon, 2003).

Now it is up to the politicians to engage in reforming their culture. Or to decide whether they will heed the nationwide call for anticorruption, clean politics and commitment to governance reform, or maintain the old practices of vote-rigging and money politics.

Whatever the results the elections will bring about changes, for better or for worse. A positive result would be a democratic election with reform-committed elected parties and individuals, Indonesia would experience a peaceful cultural movement for governance reform. Otherwise, if pro-status quo and power-hungry politicians are elected to the House of Representatives and government, we can only pray that the violent cultural revolution that was played out in Cambodia and China will not take place here.

With the 2004 elections, it is time to be more critical. People are becoming frustrated by the slow pace of reform, the economy is on the brink of collapse. There is no option for politicians and political parties but to do their best for the people and to use the elections as the impetus for the cultural movement and governance reform.