The 2004 general electiosn may be impetus for cultural movement

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.