What the future holds for the party system

Indra J. Piliang , Jakarta

Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Jusuf Kalla (SBY-JK) will definitely become the next president and vice president of the Republic of Indonesia for the 2004-2009 period, despite the support of only three minority political parties -- the Democratic Party, the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) and the Crescent Star Party (PBB).

The SBY-JK pairing managed to defeat Megawati Soekarnoputri and Hasyim Muzadi, which was backed by the Golkar Party, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the United Development Party (PPP), the Reform Star Party and the Prosperous Peace Party (PDS).

Two other political parties with a fair number of seats in the House of Representatives, the National Awakening Party (PKB) and the National Mandate Party (PAN), though choosing to remain neutral in the presidential election runoff, gave tacit support to the SBY-JK victory.

With the triumph of SBY-JK and the loss suffered by Mega and Hasyim, is it true that the machines of the political parties have been crippled as confidently stated by many observers? This may be the case in connection with the defeat of the Nationhood Coalition-backed Mega-Hasyim ticket. But the assumption may be mistaken as this ticket got most of its votes from PDI-P and PDS members.

What went wrong, then? The first political mistake was actually made when the Nationhood Coalition was formed to ensure the victory of Mega and Hasyim. Golkar (along with the PKB) and PPP failed in the first-round of the presidential election to get their Wiranto-Salahuddin Wahid and Hamzah Haz-Agum Gumelar tickets elected. The defection of party voters had already begun in this round, particularly following a waning in the popularity of the parties after the April 5 legislative elections. Wiranto and Salahuddin were "outsiders" to Golkar and the PKB, and so was Agum to the PPP.

Therefore, when Golkar and PPP leaders tried to force their voters to elect Mega-Hasyim, a political rebellion took place at the grassroots level. Besides, with the floating mass concept promoted during the New Order period, loyal constituencies for Golkar and the PPP were never properly formed. The agreement between the top leaders of the parties was not capable of being fully implemented at the grassroots level. The political feuding in some regions between PDIP and Golkar supporters hampered cooperation at the lower levels.

Following the coalition's loss in the presidential election, can the political parties still be relied on? Sure they can, as the parties' roles in both the central and local legislatures is still dominant. The position of a political party's leader is made much stronger under Law No.23/2002 on legislative institutions. With the right of a party to recall its members from the country's legislatures, the independence of legislators is not as strong as it was previously. Parties are able to influence the legislative, oversight and budgeting processes in the legislature. Golkar has shown how real this power is by ousting nine party executives, including those elected in the April 5 election.

It is thus misleading to assume a lack of party influence in the future, especially as regards government policy. The SBY-JK pairing will obviously be supported by allied parties in running the government, notably in the Cabinet. The appointment of ministers from the political parties is needed to provide a buffer against the pressure from other parties in the House. If the Nationhood Coalition is consistent with its decision to serve as the opposition, the government will face significant hurdles in applying its policies.

However, as the House has no power to dissolve the government, unless this is done through impeachment, which involves the Constitutional Court and the People's Consultative Assembly (MPR), the pressure that can be brought to bear by this "opposition" will be limited to the budgeting, legislative and oversight fields. To the public at large, the more the House can exercise control over the government, the more checks and balances will be created in the context of the executive- legislative relationship. The government would no longer be able to make strategic decisions on a whim.

The implementation of local autonomy on a more extensive scale will also affect the relationship between the central government and local administrations. The SBY-JK pairing does not enjoy majorities on local councils. The nationhood alliance's domination of the legislatures in most regions only serves to increase the political problems that SBY-JK will have to deal with.

Another challenge for the new government revolves around the election of local chief executives. The provisions of revised Law No.22/1999 on local administration, which only allow political parties to nominate candidates for local chief executive elections, will make it hard for SBY-JK to get their men into the top jobs at the local level. The effectiveness of the parties will also be tested during the succession process for 33 governors and 441 regents/mayors and their deputies later on. If the winning candidates come from the coalition, assuming it remains solid, the government could well find its work running into difficulties.

This would serve to reduce the political power and influence of the new president. The central government will encounter a number of cases -- also faced by President Megawati -- involving natural resources management and central-local financial sharing.

But with regard to party agendas over the next 1 to 2 years, it is worth noting that the leaders of a number of parties will be replaced. If the influence of SBY-JK on the parties concerned strengthens, leading to the removal of, for instance, Golkar's Akbar Tandjung by Fahmi Idris, the central government may enjoy greater support. Some regional board executives of Golkar are also known to be loyal backers of SBY-JK, whose taking of over 60 percent of the vote shows the strong cross-party grass roots support for the pair, even in provinces won by Golkar in the April 5 legislative elections.

The above description shows how the political parties have not been weakened, but have not automatically been strengthened either. Lots of internal and external issues will affect the roles they play. If these parties are capable of modernizing and reforming, they will continue to survive in society. Should they fail, however, the authority of the political parties, and by extension the country's legislatures, will be considerably reduced. They are indeed at the crossroads, and their respective futures depend on how they respond to the problems they face.

The writer is a researcher at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, and a program manager with the SET Foundation.