Indonesia's 'elite politik' plots to control elections

BY
MAX LANE

JAKARTA — Any analysis of Indonesian politics during the last year
three years, especially since the downfall of President Abdurrahman Wahid,
has to take account of the steady rise in the masses’ alienation from the
Indonesian political elite.

The "elite politik’‘, as it is called in the media and on the streets,
is a very concrete grouping for the Indonesian masses, not just a sociological
category. It comprises all the major political parties in the Indonesian
parliament and the cabinet. The pinnacle representatives of this "elite
politik’‘ are President Megawati Sukarnoputri, House of Representatives
chairperson Akbar Tanjung and Peoples Consultative Assembly chairperson
Amien Rais.

This elite’s collapse of legitimacy was reflected last week in a poll
published by Jakarta's leading mainstream newspaper, Kompas. The
poll identified Megawati as the most popular political figure from among
the elite — although she polled just 10%. All the other figures received
much lower poll results. The combined vote for seven of the most prominent
members of the political elite was barely above 20%.

Throughout Indonesia, the parliament and the government are held in
contempt. Even one of the more genuine personalities in the parliament,
Aberson Sillalahi, a member of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle
(PDIP) and one of the most outspoken PDIP critics of Suharto during the
dictatorship, called on November 28 for the parliament's dissolution.

He referred, in particular, to the several cases when parliament had
not reached quorums when deciding on key legislation. Recently, the parliament
was unable to pass new legislation required for the holding of general
elections. Only after increased public pressure, reflected through the
media, did the parliament finally pass new laws on political parties.

With increased concern about whether the parliament will be able to
prepare legislation in time, some PDIP members of parliament have openly
raised the possibility of postponing the 2004 elections. They have suggested
that it might be sufficient to simply hold a referendum to extend the current
government and parliamentary term.

This discussion is still in its early stages. However, more obvious
methods to consolidate the major political parties’ dominance are embodied
in the new legislation.

New conditions for parties with no current parliamentary representation
are so severe, that it is possible that only the seven major parties may
be able to participate in the elections. All such parties need to prove
they have branches in more than 50% of Indonesia's provinces, membership
in 50% of all administrative districts in these provinces and, further,
that they have members in 50% of all sub-district administrative areas
of all districts where a party claims to have members.

At the moment only the PDIP, Golkar, the United Development Party (PPP),
the National Awakening Party, the National Mandate Party (PAN), the Star
and Crescent Party (PBB) and, perhaps, the Justice Party (PK), can be assured
of meeting the new conditions. Such a spectrum would restrict representation
permanently to the current "elite politik’‘. Apart from Megawati's increasingly
conservative PDIP, there will remain a heavy bias towards former Suharto
era parties (Golkar, PPP) and rightist parties operating under the Islamic
banner (PAN, PBB and PK, but also including the PPP).

Another party that may be able to meet the conditions is the Peoples
Democratic Party (PRD), especially if it was supported by the radical mass
organisations such as the Indonesian National Front for Labour Struggles
and various locally based mass organisations. The fact that the PRD was
registered for the 1999 elections now counts for nothing. All parties must
re-register under the new conditions.

The legislation defines political parties as organisations established
to participate in elections. So human rights and democracy activists are
concerned that a party's failure to achieve electoral registration will
amount to a de facto ban on it. They are worried that parties that do not
meet the conditions for electoral registration may not be allowed to engage
in other political activities as political parties.

There is also some concern that these provisions may be aimed at active
radical parties, in particular the PRD. There are at least another 250
parties registered with the Department of Law and Human Rights.

The new law also formalises the ban on Marxist and communist parties.
In addition, it bans parties from adopting policies that conflict with
government policies aimed at preserving the “unitary state of the Republic
of Indonesia”. This may be used to suppress parties arguing for a federal
structure or supporting self-determination for Aceh and West Papua.

Parliamentarians have been appearing on television almost daily during
the last weeks defending the legislation as providing for “stability” and
“good government”, and arguing against the current plethora of parties.
Media comment joins street opinion, however, in echoing a common theme
that the new legislation is meant to do no more than consolidate the elite
politik position.

This sentiment was further reinforced on November 28, when the parliament
passed a new law regulating television and radio broadcasting. Despite
strong protests from democracy activists, journalists and television stations,
the parliament overwhelming supported the new bill. It provides for a broadcasting
commission directly responsible to the president, with broad but vaguely
defined powers to regulate TV and radio content. Thousands of journalists
and activists demonstrated outside the parliament on November 28.

The gap between the major parties, with their 20% support, and mass
sentiment is growing daily. The parliament is preparing for an election
where the overall sentiment will be that the elections offer no choice.
A debate is starting to emerge within the democratic movement over how
to deal with this phenomenon. Should there be a call for immediate dissolution
of the parliament and new elections under existing more democratic laws?
Should there be a boycott campaign? And how can the democratic sector of
society be united and mobilised to provide an alternative to the parties
of the elite politik?

[Max Lane, chairperson of Action in Solidarity with Asia and the Pacific
(ASAP), will be speaking in Sydney on December 12. The meeting, titled
“Indonesia’s political crisis, Islamic fundamentalism and the 'war on terrorism’”
will be held at the Resistance Bookshop, 23 Abercrombie Street, Chippendale,
at 6.30pm. For more information phone Jon on 0438 172 597.]

From Green Left Weekly, December 4, 2002.

Visit the Green Left Weekly
home page. 

From GLW issue 519