The bumpy road to true democratic society

The bumpy road to true democratic society

This article is based on the presentation of political
observer Ichlasul Amal, rector of Gadjah Mada University, in the
discussion "Postelection Indonesia: Who Will Be the Fourth
President?" held recently at The Jakarta Post's representative
office in Yogyakarta.

YOGYAKARTA (JP): Gadjah Mada University has predicted what
would happen after the elections and prepared a scenario based on
an "objective" mechanism. Yet, objective things are often
neglected unless conditions for the objectivity to occur are
fulfilled. During the rule of Soeharto, for example, there were
many suggestions about what Soeharto should do to prevent the
situation from going from bad to worse, yet nothing was done
until the multi-sided crisis forced him to resign.

The situation is repeating itself now. The people have
foreseen the possibility of certain political parties winning an
equal number of votes, thus rendering a bumpy presidential
election, although the 1945 Constitution clearly stipulates that
the election in the presidential system only elects members of
the House of Representatives. Therefore, the winner will only
dominate the legislative body and not automatically become the
president. In the parliamentary system, however, the winner of
the elections would automatically become prime minister.

The problem is our presidential system also acknowledges the
People's Consultative Assembly (MPR). This is unique as probably
the only one in the world. Indonesia follows a mixed system which
is very specific. We do not know why our past leaders formed the
MPR, which has no precedent in world history.

Generally when we talk about the presidential system, we refer
to the U.S. system which is based on the mechanism of checks and
balances. People elect members of the House of Representatives
and the president. The House and the president act as a check and
balance for each other. It is not the case here, however, because
the MPR is above both of them.

In the MPR itself there are two crucial and controversial
issues of the regional and group representatives. It is obvious
that whoever is in power exploits and manipulates the group
representation system to maintain power. The regional
representatives system also has been exploited for the same
reason. Although in the New Order era they were appointed
according to the amount of votes garnered in each region, a
governor ultimately was in charge. The system was considered
correct because it was based on the interpretation of those in
power.

The situation is more difficult at present as the winner of
the elections, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI
Perjuangan), does not hold a full majority. It needs a coalition,
or whatever it is called, to secure enough votes in the MPR.
Remember, there are two components in the Assembly that are
unpredictable, the regional and the group representatives.

It is true that the General Elections Commission (KPU) has
determined that the group representatives would represent women,
non-governmental organizations and universities. Yet, it's not
yet clear who will decide on them, how the appointment will be
done, from which NGOs or universities should the representatives
be selected and so on.

During Soeharto's rule, the group representatives did not have
their own factions. All of them were members of the ruling Golkar
Party. Now, it is not as clear-cut. All the uncertainty could
invite protests in the future because there is no guarantee that
the winner of the elections also will dominate the MPR unless it
collects at least 60 percent of the vote.

The situation will provide political brokers a bigger chance
to speculate about the presidential election mechanism. To avoid
such uncertainty, I believe it is time to introduce the one-man-
one-vote mechanism in the MPR. It's important to prevent the
legislators from repeating the bad practices of the New Order
government.

In this case, it's also important to apply a secret ballot
system in applying the mechanism and not by asking the members of
the MPR to stand up to vote. The practice has been implemented in
China. What used to be a 100 percent of the votes has turned into
a variety of results, including 250 abstentions.

Therefore, a major change in the MPR's membership procedure
has to be established. The last General Session of the MPR
decided that the MPR should hold an assembly every year. It is a
bit odd. What are they going to discuss in such an annual
assembly? Such a decision is not an answer to the question about
the current problem.

Under such a condition, should the proposition I mentioned
above be acceptable, the presidential election process could be
"manipulated" in a good sense that whoever comes out from the
process would be 100 percent accepted by the people.

Another method, for example, could be done by using the so-
called stage-by-stage presidential election. It is done by first
making nominations from which 15 best nominees, for example, are
selected. In the second round, 10 of them would screened out.
Each of the five would then be required to present their programs
to prevent us from buying a pig from a poke.

The next step is voting. The one who gets the highest votes
will be named president, the one who gets the second highest will
be vice president. All of this process is done openly.

If we continue to be caught up in the current debate over
coalitions we will end up in even greater uncertainty.

The Australian Ambassador once told me that PDI Perjuangan's
coalition with the reformist parties could not be taken for
granted, and that it could possibly ally with Habibie instead in
a presidential election deadlock.

Should this happen, the new government would obviously invite
a debate that in turn would also yield in to other political
brokers. This could cause new instability.

The mechanism I am proposing could be the most feasible way
to overcome the deadlock as right from the beginning we have to
accept the principles of democracy.

There are signs that underground movements are at work and
possibly there also are many underground forces at play creating
numerous scapegoats in the process. This is one thing we should
avoid should we want to enter a democratic era.

The proposed mechanism will also avoid the most dreadful
possibility of the resurgence of aliran politics (underlying
religious, cultural affiliations). Government leaders since the
1950s have tried hard to eradicate aliran politics. Yet, such
groupings still exist today.

Maybe, with everything moving to a better situation, with a
mechanism that we will accept and apply transparently, we are
forced to accept realities. This, in turn, will make it possible
for us to look back at the MPR's membership system, especially
the one regarding the regional and group representatives, and
give it new thought. Gadjah Mada University has suggested that
regional and group representatives should be elected separately
from members of the House of Representatives to ensure they would
be truly representative of their professed groups or regions.

The system suitable for electing regional representatives is,
therefore, the full district system. We should bear in mind that
the tension between Java and regions outside could rise to the
surface in the near future. We should anticipate this right from
the start.(swa)