The phenomenal rise of Prosperous Justice Party

Muhamad Ali, Lecturer, State Islamic University (UIN), Sharif Hidayatullah, Jakarta

Although the final result has not yet been declared, many seem to agree that the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) has made quite an impressive achievement in the April 5 legislative election. The PKS won only 1.5 percent of the vote in the 1999 election under its old name, the Justice Party (PK); it has, thus far, gained about 7 percent. Questions therefore arise as to the reasons behind the success, the future of the party and the future of Indonesian politics in general.

Saiful Muzani, a political analyst, observed that although the PK did not break through the electoral threshold of 2 percent in 1999, its members and activists seem to have worked harder to consolidate its ranks through social activities. "Justice" and "Prosperity" became the two normative principles that the PKS has promoted. "Caring and clean" became their campaign slogan.

The PKS has been building an image as a party with a strong commitment to good and clean government. PKS activists, generally, are educated, simple and clean. The PKS' peaceful and orderly street demonstrations on the Iraq war, the Palestinian question and on other domestic issues before the March campaigning period helped build an image of a caring and peaceful party.

It is not surprising that sympathy and support came not only from religious but also "secular" leaders and the general public. Nurcholish Madjid, for example, became a guest campaigner for the PKS.

Image formation is important for the PKS. Its leaders are aware of public disenchantment at the New Order, publicly associated with KKN (corruption, collusion and nepotism). The PKS has witnessed disillusionment on the part of many young people at the government of President Megawati Soekarnoputri, which they saw as incapable of keeping up the pace of reform.

The emphasis on a clean image has been quite attractive to the public within the context of popular grievances and uncertainties about Indonesia's future. The PKS is also promoting a change in national leadership and working on a alliance with other parties committed to clean government.

I remembered a time in 2000 when a PK member who was studying in Britain said that the most important thing for the PK was to act for the benefit of the people through real action programs. I am not very surprised now by the current situation, in which the PKS has gained sympathy from other parties and the public.

William Liddle, an American analyst of Indonesian politics, observed recently in Yogyakarta that the PKS portrayed to villagers the image of an organized, modern and people-oriented party.

As Saiful has suggested, although the PKS is known for its commitment to "Islamization" in Indonesia, under the leadership of Hidayat Nurwahid such a commitment has been transformed substantively into a campaign against corruption. During the campaign, the PKS did not promote exclusive Islamic objectives such as the establishment of sharia (Islamic law).

Unlike the PAS (the Malaysian Islamic Party) which promoted the establishment of an Islamic state, the PKS did not campaign explicitly to promote an Islamic state in Indonesia. Nor did the PKS promote the controversial Jakarta Charter, which postulates that Muslims should obey sharia.

Instead, Hidayat Nurwahid introduced the idea of Mitsaq al- Madinah (the Medina Charter), a treaty between the Prophet Muhammad and the Jews in Medina under which Muslims and Jews cooperated and protected each other. In the Medina Charter, the obligations and rights of all parties were justly recognized.

But, I should add, the Indonesian situation is quite different from the time of the Prophet and therefore the concept of the Medina Charter should not be applied as formally and literally as it was originally understood. Instead, it is universal values, such as cooperation, justice and tolerance between different groups, that should be nurtured today.

The PKS claims to be a dakwah party, one that promotes Islamic values. Here dakwah does not mean to convert non-Muslims to Islam. The PKS believes that although Muslims are in the majority, they are not Islamic enough in a real sense because they are still corrupt and underdeveloped. The Islamic values that the PKS always desires to propagate are cleanliness, professionalism, justice, economic equality and recognition of human rights.

For the PKS, democracy and Islam are not incompatible. The PKS is also a modern party, deploying all modern means to achieve its goals. Some of its leaders were educated in Western universities. The PKS seems to be promoting an Islamized modernity and economic system.

Islam and politics for the PKS are one, but the integration should not be formalized. Severing the hands of thieves and stoning people for adultery, for example, simply cannot be enforced under Indonesian pluralism.

Tolerance is a value that needs to be strengthened. The great challenge for Islamic parties such as the PKS is to act within the context of a multireligious and multicultural Indonesian society. If the PKS turns out to be exclusive or sectarian, it will lose its public sympathy and trust.

Formalized, sectarian politics would not bring about security, justice and prosperity for the people. Sectarian politics would only lead to social distrust, weaken public participation and cause a sense of injustice.