Traitors or saviors?

Traitors or saviors?

Few Indonesians, if any, will deny that fraud and other
irregularities were committed during the recent legislative
elections -- a fact that has been substantiated by the General
Elections Supervisory Commission (Panwaslu). Talk of the strong
possibility that fraud and violations would occur on voting day
had been rife among politically literate observers and the
general public weeks before the actual voting began on April 5.

Since it became clear the General Elections Commission (KPU)
appeared unable to overcome the host of problems it was
confronted with, the door was left wide open for unscrupulous
balloting officials to manipulate both the ballots and the
voters. The slow tally of votes that followed further
strengthened voters' suspicions of fraud and manipulation.

As has been reported earlier, the Panwaslu, in a statement
released on Monday validated those suspicions for at least seven
voting stations in the Bondowoso regency in East Java and voting
was repeated. In other areas, repeat elections were held due to
fraud committed by certain parties or confusion over misaddressed
balloting papers. Party officials have also charged regency
officials with coercing voters to vote in favor of the political
parties they supported, a practice that appeared to have been
common in the Soeharto era, when coercion was the accepted means
to ensure an absolute majority for the ruling party in the
national legislature and thereby perpetuate Soeharto's stay in
power.

The relevant question, as far as the public is concerned, is
how widespread and how significant were those irregularities? For
certain, fraud and vote manipulation are difficult to prevent in
a democratic election in a country as vast and as complex as
Indonesia. Hence, it reasonable to believe they did indeed occur,
at least to a certain extent. But to what extent they occurred
can only be determined after the Panwaslu issues its final report
on the matter. After all, the commission, like the KPU, is an
independent body with observers spread throughout the country.
Moreover, to the best of our knowledge, the commission is
comprised of individuals of the highest personal repute. For that
reason, until it issues its final report -- which can only be
expected after the tallying is completed in a few more days --
the best thing the Indonesian public can do is wait and refrain
from taking any hasty action.

Viewed from this perspective, it is easy to understand the
strong and widespread disapproval that greeted the rejection last
week of the election by 19 mostly minor political parties, as
made public by two of the group's spokesmen, lawyer Adnan Buyung
Nasution and former president Abdurrahman "Gus Dur" Wahid, of the
National Awakening Party (PKB).

Their critics, a range of religious and community leaders and
intellectuals, included such highly respected personalities as
Prof. Azyumardi Azra and the chairman of the Indonesian Committee
for Religion and Peace, Prof. Dien Syamsuddin. In a meeting on
Sunday, they called the rejection an act of panic and "treason
against the people", which would only serve to confuse the
nation.

While calling on the KPU to address the shortcomings of the
recent election, the group of critics appealed to the public to
channel any complaints through the proper legal channels, as
provided by the General Election Law, and patiently await the
final results of the vote count lest undue protests upset
national stability.

Such fears are not unfounded at the moment. Already, the
Jakarta stock market and the national currency, the rupiah --
that were buoyed initially by the relatively calm and trouble-
free legislative election -- reacted negatively to the rejection
by the "Alliance of 19 Political Parties for the Protection of
the Nation." What effect this rejection will have on the
political constellation in Indonesia remains to be seen. It is
safe to say, however, that assuming the group remains consistent
in its stance, it is bound to affect analysts' projections post-
elections.