The season not to be silly

'Tis the time of the "silly season", that time of year when politicians pledge the sun and deliver the moon.

With the promise of power beckoning, the front-runners for the presidential runoff are engaged in making pacts and alliances.

It implies a regressive, elitist mind-set that relies on political icons rather than winning the hearts and minds of voters. It is a case of electoral sleight of hand: A hasty political endorsement means quick votes.

Or so they thought.

One thing the year of elections has taught us is that the political dinosaurs (i.e. parties) of the past are just that: inflexible, behemoth institutions that are slowly becoming irrelevant.

Indonesian voters have a mind of their own and are increasingly bucking the traditional loyalties of the past.

Even though the formation of political coalitions is a perfectly legitimate strategy, we do not believe that should be the primary foundation of our next president's electoral bid.

Secret pacts between the privileged few serve only to undermine the value of the democratic process.

They undercut the significance of voters' rights, as the government eventually formed fails to reflect sincerely the winning candidate's vision, the very thing that people have voted for in the first place.

Cabinet appointments are based on the lowest common denominator, producing a government selected through concessions, favors and profiteering, as agreed upon by the coalition.

To borrow poet James R. Lowell's words, "they enslave their children's children who make compromise with sin".

This is nothing short of an affront to the integrity of the presidential election, whose essence is the direct accountability of the executive to the governed.

It is with high hope that we welcome the suggestion that presidential candidates identify their preference for key cabinet appointments, to let voters know the potential catalysts in strategic postings.

The selection of a cabinet is not an act of magic in which a president pulls unknown entities out of a hat. Nor should it be approached as a division of the spoils, as expected of pilfering conquerors.

We believe the all-important trade and economic portfolios to be appointments, the potential nominees for which should be disclosed immediately.

These posts, which provide access to much of the state's revenues, are especially susceptible to compromise and particularly attractive to being auctioned off in a political exchange.

Corruption, the sulfuric acid that corrodes the democratic process, is an acute problem in all sectors of the state. Hence, the naming of a strong individual as potential attorney general to combat this malady is another matter that must be given priority.

Individuals selected for these key posts must reflect the virtues of the elected president.

Ideally, they should be men or women of character whose interest is to the nation and loyalty to the president, not the party that ushered them into their plush postings.

It is time to end the plundering of state resources for party interests, as occurred in the past.

Whoever is appointed to the cabinet may not necessarily have to be the most talented in their field, but rather, be of unquestionable integrity.

The disclosure of the core cabinet team sends an affirmative signal of a presidential candidate's commitment to key programs and provides a tangible rationale to attract voters.

Electoral platforms are important, but, as we have seen over the past six months, few voters understand or even care about them.

With little ideological divergence to separate the final two candidates in the race for the presidency, the decisive factor for voters will ultimately be one of personality.

Being open about the nucleus of one's shadow cabinet will help prevent the election from turning into a political "beauty contest", with all the damage to the nation's integrity that would ensue.