Traitors or saviors?

Few Indonesians, if any, will deny that fraud and other irregularities were committed during the recent legislative election -- a fact that has been substantiated by the General Election Supervisory Committee (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 reported earlier, 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 some 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 democratic elections in a country as vast and as complex as Indonesia. Hence, it is 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 elections 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 elections, the group of critics appealed to the public to channel any complaints through the proper legal channels, as provided by the General Elections 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 for post-election Indonesia.