Promoting peace, human rights and democracy in Indonesia
111 Northwood Road, Thornton Heath, Surrey, CR7 8HW
Tel: +44 (0)20 8771 2904/+44 (0)1420 80153 Fax: +44 (0)20 8653 0322
Email: tapol@gn.apc.org
|
Promoting peace, human rights and democracy in Indonesia |
| Home | Elections | News | Press | Reports | Bulletin | Publications | About | Links |
Contents:
Democrats Take Safe Lead, But Non-Votes Triumph [4 May]
With about 50 percent of the total votes counted, the Democratic Party is assured victory in the legislative elections with 19.46 percent of the popular vote, followed by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) with 15.9 percent and the Golkar Party with 15.3 percent. [full story…]
Four Major Parties Sign Pact to Form an Opposition [4 May]
Four major political parties have signed a “ jumbo coalition” agreement aimed at strengthening their positions in the legislature, party officials said. The Golkar Party and the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the 2004 poll winners, entered a coalition that also included two upstart parties — the Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra) and People’s Conscience Party (Hanura) — believed to have been among the 10 largest vote getters in the April 9 legislative elections. [full story…]
Also: Yudhoyono May Be Driven into Islamic Fold [2 May] [full story…]
James Van Zorge: It’s About Hearts and Minds, Not Coalitions [2 May] [full story…]
Drop Kalla Candidacy, Say Golkar Districts [5 May]
Dozens of Golkar district chapters on Monday called on the party to drop its decision to pair party chairman Jusuf Kalla with former General Wiranto in the July 8 presidential election and instead return to a coalition with the Democratic Party, the clear winner of last month’s legislative elections. [full story…]
The Thinker: SBY Victory Portends Decline in Radicalism [22 April]
The Democratic Party’s victory in the legislative elections was largely due to the hard work and success of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration in several vital areas, particularly in the security sector. Yudhoyono has all but freed Indonesians from fear of terror attacks by groups such as Jemaah Islamiyah and Jamaah Tauhid wal Jihad. His party’s victory is a harbinger of a future victory in the July presidential election. Should he win, it would not bode well for Indonesian terrorist groups. Not only would they struggle to grow, they would likely decline, if not die out completely. [full story…]
Also: FEER - Indonesian Exceptionalism [23 April] [full story…]
Jakarta Globe Editorial: Democratic Process Should be Protected [22 April]
A veiled threat by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, or PDI-P, and a block of opposition parties to boycott the upcoming presidential election could create a constitutional crisis and damage the country’s hard- won democratic credentials. The party must be prevented from doing so by public and media pressure. There is a more crucial issue at stake — the sanctity and credibility of the elections and the democratic process. All efforts must be made to protect against the erosion of voter confidence and the undermining of the entire electoral process. [full story…]
Also: Retired Generals Join Poll Debate [23 April] [full story…]
JG editorial: Respecting the Will of the People [24 April] [full story…]
James Van Zorge: Before the Suspicions Really Set In, A Road Map for Carrying Out Elections [24 April] [full story…]
New York Times: Indonesia’s Do-It-Yourself Campaign [3 May] [full story…]
Rights body forms team over flawed voter lists [22 April]Also: NGOs Sue Govt Over Voter List Fiasco [23 April] [full story…]
Calls for KPK to Broaden Its Probe Into Poll Fiasco [2 May] [full story…]
RI's Elections: The Regional Dividend [22 April]
The recently held general election in Indonesia demonstrated convincingly that plural societies in Southeast Asia can be trusted to express their popular will without resorting to violent conflict. After three peaceful elections in the past decade, it is now important for Indonesia to impress upon its regional neighbors that the democratic political process is a significant treatment for chronic conflict within society. [full story…]
A Mixed Bag for Aceh’s Local Parties in Elections [23 April]
The Aceh Party, founded by former guerilla fighters from the Free Aceh Movement, or GAM, is the only one of six local political parties in the province to clear the 5 percent electoral threshold guaranteeing their future. [full story…]
Also: A Deeper Look into the Recent Elections in Aceh [28 April] [full story…]
It’s Official: Aceh Party Secures Majority Of Seats in Provincial Legislative Council [1 May] [full story…]
ST/McBeth: A Tale of Two Provinces [24 April]
THE legislative elections in Indonesia's two separatist-inclined regions have thrown up two very different outcomes: one free of unrest or controversy, the other under a cloud of electoral shenanigans. The politics in the provinces that bookend the sprawling archipelago are very different. [full story…]
Activists’ Families Warn Major Parties of Mixing With Rights Violators [24 April]
Families of activists missing since 1997 have called on candidates hoping to run in the July presidential election to avoid cooperating with parties led by individuals linked to past human rights violations. [full story…]
Also: Human Rights in Indonesia are Threatened [1 May] [full story…]
Indonesia Expert Jeffrey Winters Says Golkar a Class Act Soap Opera [28 April]
Citizens and political analysts can always expect world class soap-opera entertainment from the Golkar Party, according to Jeffrey Winters, an expert on Indonesia. According to Winters, Golkar is still pretty much drugged out with its past glory during the New Order era under the rule of dictator Suharto. [full story…]
Also: Labor Coalition Endorses Yudhoyono, Cites Programs Benefiting the Poor [4 May] [full story…]
Democrats Take Safe Lead, But Non-Votes Triumph
The Jakarta Globe
Monday, May 4, 2009
Camelia Pasandaran
With about 50 percent of the total votes counted, the Democratic Party is assured victory in the legislative elections with 19.46 percent of the popular vote, followed by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) with 15.9 percent and the Golkar Party with 15.3 percent.
The three parties join a total of nine that are expected to achieve the 2.5 percent threshold needed to win seats in the House of Representatives (DPR).
With more than 64 million votes counted so far, the three leading parties are followed by the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS) with 8.3 percent of the vote, the National Mandate Party (PAN) with 6.25 percent, the United Development Party (PPP) with 5.7 percent, the Great Indonesian Movement Party (Gerindra) with 4.6 percent, the National Awakening Party (PKB) with 4 percent and the People’s Conscience Party (Hanura) with 3.7 percent.
The vote recapitulation process has been marred by accusations of vote rigging from election officials at both the district and provincial levels and political party witnesses. The General Elections Commission (KPU) has been criticized for failing to address the complaints, despite evidence being presented.
Bambang Eka Cahya Widodo, a member of the Elections Supervisory Board (Bawaslu) said that the “KPU should be more open to accepting political parties’ complaints as long as the parties have evidence.”
“I understand that the KPU has to meet the deadline for the national announcement on May 9, but it should be working with regard for accuracy.”
The Center for Election Reform (Cetro) said on Sunday that the number of invalid votes was running at 16.73 percent.
Cetro chairman Hadar Gumay said the number was too high and double the 8.8 percent figure recorded in 2004. He said that a more internationally acceptable figure would be between 2.5 percent and 3 percent.
Another 15 percent of eligible voters chose not to vote at all, meaning that about 30 percent of the population either did not vote or ultimately had their votes declared invalid.
Bawaslu’s Bambang assigned blame for the high number of invalid votes to the KPU, saying the result was caused by a lack of voter education prior to the polls.
----------------------------------------------
Four Major Parties Sign Pact to Form an Opposition
The Jakarta Globe
Monday, May 4, 2009
Four major political parties on Friday signed a coalition agreement aimed at strengthening their positions in the legislature, party officials said.
The Golkar Party and the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), the 2004 poll winners, entered a coalition that also included two upstart parties — the Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra) and People’s Conscience Party (Hanura) — believed to have been among the 10 largest vote getters in the
April 9 legislative elections.
The coalition also involved four smaller parties that appear likely not to gain any seats from last month’s elections.
But their self-proclaimed “jumbo coalition” agreement stipulated that the four main parties would initially only work together in the legislature at the national level, in the provinces, the districts and municipalities. “We will talk about [the presidential candidate] later. We unite first, then we will decide on the technicalities. The coalition in the legislature is an initial step to set up a government,” said Golkar chairman Jusuf Kalla after the signing at the Hanura party headquarters in Menteng, Central Jakarta.
The other signatories included PDI-P chairwoman Megawati Sukarnoputri, Gerindra founder Prabowo Subianto and Hanura chairman Wiranto.
The prospect of a coalition between the four was doubted by many who said it would be difficult for the parties to agree on a pair of candidates for the presidential and vice presidential elections on July 8.
Noticeably missing from the coalition were the United Development Party (PPP) and the National Mandate Party (PAN), which had earlier been touted as potential coalition members. Their respective chairmen, Suryadharma Ali and Sutrisno Bachir, were absent at the signing.
Suryadharma’s deputy, Chozin Chumaidy, said the PPP had not signed the agreement, as the chairman was not mandated by his party to do so. Without the PPP and PAN, the coalition is believed to account for about 38 percent of the votes in the legislative elections. That may translate to about 40 percent of
the 560 seats in the House of Representatives.
Bima Arya Nugraha, of the Charta Politika Indonesia private political consultancy, said the coalition could pose a real problem for the government.
“This coalition has so much power if they become the opposition. They could be a problem for the government,” he said.
----------------------------------------------
Yudhoyono May Be Driven into Islamic Fold
The Sydney Morning Herald
Saturday, May 2, 2009
Tom Allard, Indonesia Correspondent, Jakarta
INDONESIAN President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is being driven into the arms of the country's Islamic parties, posing questions about the direction of his Government if, as expected, he is re-elected.
Mr Yudhoyono — a retired general who has overseen a moderate, cautiously reformist Government — secured a strong win in last month's legislative election, while the Islamic parties did poorly compared with 2004.
A variety of nationalist parties tied to Suharto's New Order dictatorship and the military also performed weakly but yesterday five of them announced a "koalisi besar", or grand coalition, to challenge Mr Yudhoyono in the July presidential poll.
Whether they can coalesce around a single presidential candidate remains highly uncertain but they have vowed to oppose the popular President's re-election and to use their combined parliamentary vote to stymie his policies.
Either way, it heightens the likelihood that Mr Yudhoyono's main coalition partner will be the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS), an Islamist party with its roots in Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood movement.
At least two other Islamic parties are also expected to join the coalition.
PKS dropped its platform to introduce Islamic law in 2004, supports the country's secular constitution and its support mainly derives from its strong stance against corruption.
But the party was instrumental in pressuring Mr Yudhoyono to introduce his two most controversial policies: a loosely framed anti-pornography law and the ban on proselytising by the Ahmadiyah religious sect.
Lili Romli, a political analyst at the Indonesian Institute of Sciences, said Mr Yudhoyono had to be careful managing a coalition with parties who wanted an "Islamic approach" to government.
"I think people's welfare must be the objective of the coalition," he said.
According to opinion polls Mr Yudhoyono, known as SBY, remains staggeringly popular. One recent survey had more than 80 per cent of respondents supporting his re-election.
"SBY's electability is still very high," Mr Romli said. "I guess he will win the presidential race but his intention to have a strong Parliament that can support his administration may not happen.
"The 'grand coalition' I think will make a strong opposition in the Parliament."
The "grand coalition" includes the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, led by former president Megawati Sukarnoputri, and Golkar, the party of former dictator Suharto, which is now led by Indonesian Vice-President Jusuf Kalla.
Also members of the grouping are the political vehicles for two former generals accused of overseeing gross human rights abuses during the dying days of the Suharto regime, Wiranto and Prabowo Subianto.
General Wiranto was head of the Indonesian military at the time it directed militias to kill at least 1400 East Timorese as the former Indonesian province moved to nationhood. General Prabowo was relieved of his post after it was revealed that his subordinates had abducted dozens of human rights activists while
he was commander of the special forces unit Kopassus.
--------------------------------------------
It’s About Hearts and Minds, Not Coalitions
The Jakarta Globe
May 2, 2009
James Van Zorge
Opinion
As party chiefs, presidential hopefuls and power brokers in the opposition camp are working at a frantic pace to stitch together a grand coalition to face off with President Yudhoyono in the July elections, one should seriously consider and challenge the underlying assumptions, presumed benefits and imagined futures such a coalition would bring to fruition.
In a nutshell, opposition leaders such as Jusuf Kalla of the Golkar Party and Megawati Sukarnoputri of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, or PDI-P, seem to believe that the magical key to having a decent chance at defeating the incumbent is the ability to combine their respective parties’ shares of the national parliamentary elections. This assumes, of course, voters in the legislative elections made their decisions
strictly based on party loyalties and will behave in much the same way in the upcoming presidential elections.
Party heads are also saying that a large winning coalition will create a “stable” government because it would guarantee legislative support for the president. This presumed benefit is based on two imagined futures: First, parties in a large coalition will stay united once they are in office and, second, even if the entire coalition fails to maintain their cohesion during a new administration, at least the majority of parties will show their gratitude and loyalty to the president by backing his policy agenda.
Thinking back in time, toward recent experiences in Indonesian politics, it is hard to understand how today’s politicians could possibly fall victim to such fallacious reasoning. Ever since the advent of direct elections at the national and local levels, Indonesians have consistently shown a tendency to vote based on the appeal of candidates, not their party affiliations. Wishful scenarios about a stable government because of a grand coalition coming to power also flies in the face of what happened in similar types of coalitions under previous administrations. There is no reason to believe any future coalitions would prove more successful.
Seemingly, the current cast of national politicians are caught in a time warp. With few exceptions, they learned the game of politics during the Suharto era. Despite the fact that the rules of the game have been radically altered, the old players still don’t grasp the new realities.
Thinking stable government can result from a grand coalition flies in the face of what we’ve seen in the past
In 2004, for example, Yudhoyono, a retired general and cabinet minister with practically no political machinery behind him, literally emerged from nowhere and became the front-runner in the presidential race. Very few voters gave any thought to party allegiances. The same can be said about local elections, where
there has been strong evidence of Indonesians caring little about their membership to parties. Parties don’t make for successful campaigns and candidates. Rather, smart parties choose good candidates, and they win elections based on their individual merits.
Parties such as Golkar will argue, of course, that their political machinery is valuable for their candidates. One should wonder what type of machinery. Is it their ability to give voters some gifts and money to show up at political rallies? Perhaps their network of local community leaders? Unfortunately for Golkar, none of these “assets” have much relevance in today’s elections. Voters will take money, but they vote with their hearts and minds rather than their pocketbooks when they draw the curtains at polling stations. Neither do they listen much these days to local community leaders, precisely because voters know those leaders are often getting paid to sing the praises of their corrupt paymasters in Jakarta. In essence, the Golkar machinery is not only creaky, it is antiquated. Much can be said about the rest of Indonesia’s political parties, as well.
Even if there were some residual value in political machinery, presidential hopefuls should pose some pregnant questions about political parties’ cohesiveness, and hence the real efficacy of a coalition. Few parties are, in fact, of one mind, and most of them — Golkar being the most egregious example — are fractured along competing leadership camps. If that is case, then how could a candidate rely upon the promises of party bosses on delivering votes? If Kalla, for example, ends up in a coalition with Megawati, what guarantees could he give her of his entire party throwing its support behind her? Obviously, none.
Then there is the question of how large coalitions could bring about stability in government and support for the president belonging to such a coalition. Prima facie, that argument would seem to make sense, but when you look back at previous administrations, the evidence simply does not support it.
Starting with the presidency of Abdurrahman Wahid, continuing with Megawati and now Yudhoyono, large or “rainbow” coalitions have been the norm. What benefits did these coalitions offer the incumbent? Looking at the legislative records of each president, the results are paltry, at best. Wahid was a reformist, brought all the major parties under his wing and ended up being impeached by his coalition partners. Megawati invited large parties like Golkar into her cabinet, and little of redeeming value was produced. In the case of Yudhoyono, most of the parties that ran against him in the first round of the 2004 elections were subsequently invited into his cabinet. Not much can be said in terms of their loyalty to the president inside
the cabinet or the legislature, either.
Given the strong evidence of how coalitions have proved to be of scant value, why are the political elite unable to learn the obvious lessons?
Being captive to the past is one possibility. Perhaps some of the political elite can understand the futility of coalitions, but maybe that is beside the point. After all, everybody wants to have an opportunity of being on a winning side in order to enjoy the spoils of victory. Hence the incentive is to join a coalition.
Rationally speaking, political parties should not allow coalitions to drive their electoral strategies. Sure, coalitions are important as far as meeting thresholds and hence how many candidates can qualify for running in the elections. But the belief in the power of large coalitions is wildly misplaced. In the end, parties would be better advised to focus on thinking about which candidates would have the best chances of winning over the hearts and minds of the electorate.
James Van Zorge is a Jakarta-based political analyst.
----------------------------------------------
Drop Kalla Candidacy, Say Golkar Districts
The Jakarta Globe
Tuesday, May 5, 2009
Febriamy Hutapea
Dozens of Golkar district chapters on Monday called on the party to drop its decision to pair party chairman Jusuf Kalla with former General Wiranto in the July 8 presidential election and instead return to a coalition with the Democratic Party, the clear winner of last month’s legislative elections.
The chapters argued that the coalition decision was taken without due regard to proper party mechanisms and called for the convening of another special leadership meeting.
Kalla and his former internal Golkar Party rival Wiranto were the first pair to declare their intention to contest the July 8 presidential elections.
The People’s Conscience Party (Hanura) headed by Wiranto garnered about 3.5 percent of the popular vote in the April 9 legislative elections. Combined with Golkar’s 14.5 percent the coalition have 18 percent of the popular vote, still 7 percent shy of the 25 percent needed to field a presidential candidate.
Fifty-one Golkar district-level chairman paid a visit to the House of Representatives to meet Golkar deputy chairman, House Speaker Agung Laksono, to convey their opposition to the Kalla-Wiranto pairing.
“We oppose the declaration of the JK-Wiranto candidacy because it doesn’t come from proper party procedures,” Aries Pudjangkoro, from Golkar’s Malang district in East Java, told Agung who had received them along with several other Golkar central board leaders.
Under last month’s special national leadership meeting, Kalla, the party chairman, was given a mandate to conduct discussions with other parties.
Kalla is expected to report the results of his move in a second meeting, this time involving district-level leaders, to allow the party to consider his decisions about its coalition partners and its candidates for the presidency and vice presidency.
Aries said that the district-level chairmen filed a complaint with the party for several reasons, including that the party had failed to impress the public and had dropped in popularity as shown in the legislative elections.
“The party central board also failed to continue its survey to select a presidential and vice presidential candidate,” he said.
Aries claimed that Golkar’s central board had made the wrong move in nominating Kalla as a presidential candidate.
The district-level chairmen called the party’s central board leaders “desperate” for supporting Kalla, regardless of his electability.
“The Golkar central board leaders were more interested in accommodating political pride,” he said.
Therefore, Aries said that they demanded the party leaders look at the reality by joining the coalition with the winning party, which was President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s Democrats.
Meanwhile, Agung said the candidacy of the Kalla-Wiranto pairing would be cross-examined at the next meeting.
“It’s on the agenda for discussion at the second leadership meeting.”
He admitted the decision to run the pair was not analyzed from the electability factor. “So far, both candidates have insignificant electability,” he said.
-------------------------------------------------
The Thinker: SBY Victory Portends Decline in Radicalism
The Jakarta Globe
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Rebecca Lunnon & Muh Taufiqurrohman
The Democratic Party’s victory in the legislative elections was largely due to the hard work and success of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s administration in several vital areas, particularly in the security sector. Yudhoyono has all but freed Indonesians from fear of terror attacks by groups such as Jemaah
Islamiyah and Jamaah Tauhid wal Jihad.
His party’s victory is a harbinger of a future victory in the July presidential election. Should he win, it would not bode well for Indonesian terrorist groups. Not only would they struggle to grow, they would likely decline, if not die out completely.
The experience of Indonesian terrorists under Yudhoyono’s administration sheds light on how they might meet their end. Major terrorist groups like JI have experienced serious losses in their leadership. Many of their key leaders, including Azahari, are dead. Many others, such as Abu Dujana and Zarkasih, are in police custody. Although police have not captured Noordin Top, their vigilant and intensive hunt hampers his movements and recruitment activities. As a result, Noordin can do nothing but seek protection from JI members or ex-members. In return for protection, these members ask him not to conduct any terrorist
attacks, for their own security.
Recruitment of terrorists must now compete with Yudhoyono’s deradicalization program, which is led by Detachment 88. This program, aimed at enlisting arrested terrorists in the government’s cause, has produced good results. Since its launch, at least 100 prominent terrorists have changed sides and are now
actively campaigning against radicalism. This number continues to grow, and will help reduce the potential recruits for Indonesian radical groups.
Terrorist groups are also losing allies in the Indonesian military as the military has begun to take serious action against officers or former officers involved with such groups.
This initiative is part of military reforms and efforts to improve coordination between the military and police on counterterrorism. It is true, however, that the two institutions still suffer from departmental conflicts. Yet, at the end of 2008, they were able to put this aside and conduct joint counterterrorism training. Such cooperation will likely develop in the areas of intelligence gathering and border patrols and this will restrict the mobility of terrorist groups.
Indonesian terrorist organizations are continually scrutinized by intelligence agencies, which have significantly improved their capacity. These agencies have accurately supplied information that has, for example, led to the disruption of planned bomb attacks in West Sumatra Province and North Jakarta in 2008. The new sophistication of these agencies is a serious deterrent. In regular meetings, members of these terrorist groups often talk about how Indonesian intelligence agencies are so good at intelligence gathering and how worried they are of infiltration.
Indonesian terrorist groups currently face significant financial issues. Lacking sufficient funds, they can do nothing but talk of jihad. Some are so hard pressed they have no money to pay the necessary travel expenses from Bandung to a training site in Bogor.
Unless they find a major donor from the Middle East or sympathetic Indonesian politicians, they cannot conduct any terror attacks. As the continual lack of funds increases their frustration, many choose to leave their true cause (violent jihad), replacing it with radical dakwa h (Islamic sermons).
To date, Yudhoyono’s successful handling of terrorism has crippled the capacity of terrorists to plan or implement new attacks. Police and intelligence officials have successfully targeted known terrorists and a successful deradicalization program has been well established.
Military reform and improved cooperation with police is becoming evident, and Indonesian intelligence capabilities have improved significantly. The continuation and improvement of such policies, coupled with internal factors within terrorist groups — such as lack of funding and leadership — portend a murky
future for these groups. That is good news for the rest of us.
Rebecca Lunnon is a postgraduate student at Monash University and Muh Taufiqurrohman holds a master’s in international relations.
----------------------------------------
Far Eastern Economic Review April 2009
Posted April 23, 2009
Richard Kraince
Over 100 million Indonesians went to the polls this month as the world's largest Muslim-majority nation held legislative elections on April 9. This is the third national election cycle since the democratization process began just a decade ago. It is also the first election in which voters cast ballots for individual legislators within a party slate, rather than merely voting for a political party itself. While this represents a major step toward making government directly accountable to voters, the process is also certain to produce a significant number of disgruntled candidates whose failure to attain a seat in the legislature may now be blamed on something other than internal party politics.
As it turns out, there is good reason for disappointment with the implementation of this year's election. The political parties managed themselves rather well throughout the campaign period; however the National Election Commission apparently made grave errors in setting up the polls. It has become apparent that a huge number of eligible names may have been left off voter rolls. Credible accusations of vote fraud also remain to be addressed. As a result, there is some question as to whether all of the country's leading political parties will sign off on vote tallies once the counting is concluded on May 9.
But before we rush to support some disenfranchised political set, it is important to understand the overall thrust of the election results. By all accounts, incumbent President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono will almost certainly emerge the victor. His Democrat Party is projected to have won a plurality in the legislative election with approximately 20% of the vote. This is nearly a three-fold increase above his party's fledgling performance in 2004. Moreover, polls gauging the popularity of candidates for the upcoming presidential election on July 8 identify Mr. Yudhoyono as the undisputed favorite ahead of all other challengers by at least 35 percentage points in an open race. Gauged against individual contenders in hypothetical two-candidate races, the president's popularity increases dramatically.
In the next position in the popularity polls is former President Megawati Sukarnoputri, who held the nation's highest office from July 2001 to October 2004. Her Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) is known for its defiant stand against the Soeharto government in 1996 as well as consistent leadership in
nationalist politics. PDI-P is projected to tie for second place in the legislative election with Golkar. As the political apparatus that orchestrated elections during the era of authoritarian politics, Golkar's experience enabled it to win a plurality of the vote in 2004. Its aging leaders now appear rudderless however in spite of their partnership in Mr. Yudhoyono's current ruling coalition. Each of these second-string parties appears to have mustered only around 14% of the vote this year, representing a decline since 2004 of approximately four percentage points for Megawati's PDI-P and a dismal seven point loss for Golkar.
Islamic political parties also experienced devastating setbacks in this election. Overall, support for Islamic parties declined from some 31% of the vote in 2004 to perhaps 20% this year. Although the conservative Justice and Prosperity Party (PKS) managed to gain a percentage point or so with 8.5% of the votes projected, it fell far shy of its 20% target. Several smaller Islamic parties appear to have suffered complete collapse as their failure to secure at least 2.5% of the vote means they will not be awarded seats in the legislature and will not be eligible to contest the next national election in 2014. This appears to be the fate of the ultra-conservative Crescent Star Party (PBB), which has reportedly been knocking on the doors of secular party offices this week in an effort to once again reduce the minimum vote threshold needed for party survival.
Aside from President Yudhoyono's growing popularity and the declining fortunes of political Islam, this election tells us some profound things about Indonesian society. In particular, to sum up the current state of Indonesian politics in a word, it appears that Indonesians have grown increasingly pragmatic in their approach to politics.
The nation's first democratic election in 1955 resulted in the emergence of four relatively distinct political blocks with nationalists, Islamic modernists, Islamic traditionalists, and communists each earning between 16% and 22% of the vote. These groupings reflected the deep social and cultural divisions that animated politics for decades and led to the deadly polarization of the mid-1960s.
The present election reveals little trace of an ideologically divided nation. On the contrary, even experienced observers of Indonesian politics are hard pressed to describe just how Golkar, PDI-P and the Democrat Party differ beyond some minor economic policy positions and of course the character of the individuals involved. Each party is considered nationalist, committed to Indonesia's official ideology of Pancasila, more or less pro-business, and ostensibly anti-graft. Each also has some track record of accommodating powerful religious lobbies when party interests are at stake.
The fourth contender, the Islamic PKS, distinguishes itself as the party of dakwah (Islamic preaching). However, as public opinion polls have suggested public frustration with divisive religious politics, PKS has moderated its approach and has attempted to woo voters by presenting itself in increasingly nationalistic terms.
In broad brush strokes, what this election thus suggests about Indonesian society is that the emotional draw of ideology, religion, charismatic leadership, and social controversy has begun to decline as concerns about good governance, fiscal accountability, and government professionalism have risen. The problem that Indonesia faces no longer stems from its past social and cultural divisions. Rather, the danger at hand
reflects the fragmentation of a political elite that has yet to understand the interests of voters while failing to grasp the nature of the new democratic playing field.
The fact is that it is hard to read this election as anything other than a significant vote of confidence in President Yudhoyono’s ability to govern—in spite of his party's current weakness in the legislature. Most of the major political players appear to have accepted this fact and are moving forward with the coalition-building process through which they will nominate candidates for the presidential election.
There will certainly be numerous disputes over legislative party seats in the coming months. Indeed, it has quickly become clear that the election of 2009 will be remembered as a serious test of Indonesia's young democracy. But there is already a legal precedent in place for handling election disputes in the courts.
Before any of Indonesia's major politicians decide to reject the election results outright and lead their supporters into the streets in protest, I suggest a whirlwind tour of the region. Indonesia's expanding sense of democracy stands in sharp contrast to several of its nearest Southeast Asian neighbors. Across the Straights in Malaysia, for example, a new prime minister has taken office amid a ban on opposition newspapers and accusations of extra-constitutional political manipulation in the northern state of Perak. In Thailand, a state of emergency continues in the capital as democratic institutions have been set aside in apparent favor of street demonstrations.
We've heard much about the world's largest Muslim-majority nation in recent years and how it has come to stand out as a model of democratic stability. We know that direct elections have been instituted at the provincial, district, and municipal levels across the country since 2005. But now with the nation facing a growing political crisis, let us hope Indonesia's current and former leaders can demonstrate to the world that all of this talk about "Indonesian exceptionalism" really has some depth.
Richard Kraince is Research Professor of Southeast Asian Humanities at the College of Mexico in Mexico City.
---------------------------------------
Editorial: Democratic Process Should be Protected
The Jakarta Globe
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
A veiled threat by the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, or PDI-P, and a block of opposition parties to boycott the upcoming presidential election could create a constitutional crisis and damage the country’s hard- won democratic credentials.
PDI-P secretary general Pramono Anung told reporters on Tuesday that his party and the opposition block, which includes the Great Indonesian Movement Party, or Gerindra, the People’s Conscience Party, or Hanura, the Reform Star Party, or PBR, and others, may not nominate a presidential candidate if the
government fails to resolve the continuing fiasco over the final voters list.
Certainly, the General Elections Commission, or KPU, has a lot to answer for, given its abysmal handling of the April 9 legislative elections. Logistics for the elections were a mess, millions of voters may have been disenfrachised and the body has been unable to explain why it failed to adequately prepare for this crucial exercise in democracy.
The body was even forced to abandon its Rp 103 billion ($9.6 million) electronic tabulation system and return to its headquarters with a paltry 13 million of the estimated 120 million votes counted so far, a far cry from its bold predictions before the polls.
Pramono Anung may have denied that he was threatening to boycott the presidential election. But he did not mince his words when he noted that if the PDI-P concludes that there has been voter fraud and thus decides not to nominate a presidential candidate, it would be within its rights.
That maybe legally correct, but as the party leading the opposition block, PDI-P has a constitutional and moral duty to put forward a candidate. If there is only one candidate, the People’s Consultative Assembly must deliberate on the presidential election or the president could issue a decree lowering the threshold for nominating a candidate for the presidency from the current 20 percent of legislative seats or 25 percent of the popular vote.
Such an outcome would be a body blow for the nation and its still young democracy. If the PDI-P questions the authenticity of the voter registration system, it should use the courts to pursue its case, not jeopardize the presidential election. If it does carry out its threat, it would cause immeasurable damage to the country.
The party must therefore be prevented from doing so by public and media pressure. There is a more crucial issue at stake — the sanctity and credibility of the elections and the democratic process. All efforts must be made to protect against the erosion of voter confidence and the undermining of the entire electoral
process.
It remains unclear how the voter registration debacle will unfold. In the end, the number may have a minimal impact on the outcome of the legislative elections. The PDI-P should, therefore, allow the counting of the votes to be completed and the results announced before making any damaging public statements.
The KPU may have been inept, but so far there is no evidence of widespread voter fraud. The KPU must be allowed to complete its job without political interference or pressure. The alternative could be political chaos.
------------------------------------------
Retired Generals Join Poll Debate
The Jakarta Globe
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Markus Junianto Sihaloho
Amid the heated political tensions ahead of the presidential elections, former military generals have divided into two groups supporting different candidates.
The first group of former generals support allegations by parties defeated in April 9’s legislative election that
President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s winning Democratic Party cheated and agree with a suggestion by the defeated parties that they should refuse to nominate a presidential candidate.
The other group is likely to support Yudhoyono’s previous statement that all politicians should settle any election disputes by legal action.
The first group, led by the chairman of the Great Indonesian Movement Party, or Gerindra, retired Lt. Gen. Prabowo Subianto, visited the chairwoman of Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, or PDI-P, Megawati Soekarnoputri, at her Jakarta home on Wednesday.
Others at the meeting included retired First Adm. Mulyo Wibisono, retired Maj. Gen. Djasri Marin, retired Lt. Gen. Suaidy Marasabessy, retired Brig. Gen. Roch Basuki and retired Brig. Gen. Khalid Ghazali.
Prabowo and Megawati were among the political party leaders who criticized and aired allegations of cheating over the conduct of the April 9 poll.
They had also warned they would refuse to nominate a presidential candidate in July’s presidential election if the government failed to first answer their complaints and resolve issues such as the flawed final voter list.
Speaking after the meeting, Prabowo said they met Megawati to discuss the voter list data issue. He denied the meeting was used to counter Yudhoyono’s campaign team, which also includes several retired military generals.
“We didn’t talk about boycotting the elections,” Prabowo said.
At about the same time, another group made a different statement in a news conference in Jakarta, led by retired Gen. Agum Gumelar, chairman of Armed Forces Veteran Association, and also attended by former commander of Army’s Strategic Command, retired Gen. Wismoyo Arismunandar.
Agum denied to reporters his group held the news conference to support statements by Yudhoyono. However, what he said during the briefing was in complete accord with recent public utterances by the president.
Agum acknowledged that the General Election Commission, or KPU, had made several mistakes in conducting the April 9 poll, however, he urged parties to stop accusing Yudhoyono’s Democratic Party of having engaged in vote manipulation.
He claimed that control tools had been installed in the election system, which made it very difficult to cheat.
“We urge the KPU to evaluate and improve the process,” Agum said.
------------------------------------------
Editorial: Respecting the Will of the People
The Jakarta Globe
Friday, April 24, 2009
As the political drama unfolds, media attention has been riveted on the horse-trading among the country’s political parties over the past few weeks. It seems that every day a new permutation of a possible coalition to contest the July presidential election is discussed.
For the moment, the attention is focused on Golkar’s next move. Will the once all-powerful political party go it alone? Will it enter a coalition with the PDI-P, former President Megawati Sukarnoputri’s Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle? Or will it return to the bargaining table and attempt to hammer out a deal with President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s Democratic Party?
While these developments have kept the press and the politicians buzzing, we have somehow overlooked the core issue. In direct elections, it is the people who will ultimately decide the outcome and no amount of maneuvering by the political elite will change that reality.
Democracy, as it was defined by the ancient Greeks, means the will of the people. And in the results of the April 9 legislative elections, the people voiced their will loud and clear. Despite continuing complaints by the political parties over voter registration and problems with the ballot papers, it does not seem that the people have a problem with either the early results of the elections or with Yudhoyono.
The problem, it seems, lies with the political elite who have not come to terms with the results. Across the board, the working classes and the middle class voted overwhelmingly for Yudhoyono’s party and this choice must be respected.
In a direct election, candidates for public office are often elected as much for their likability as for their message and vision. Sadly, we have not heard of any major presidential candidate hoping to challenge the incumbent proclaim his or her vision. As such, Yudhoyono has emerged as the most likely winner regardless of whom he picks as his vice president.
This does not mean, however, that Yudhoyono can afford to be complacent or that his political rivals will admit defeat. That is the essence of a democracy. Yudhoyono must move forward on his agenda and not alienate support for him within the other political parties and the wider public. He will need all the support he can garner to ensure that his programs are fully realized.
He must also announce his vice presidential candidate soon to reduce the uncertainty. Already the feverish political climate is having a negative impact on equity markets as investors stay on the sidelines.
Megawati must be praised for her principled stand as an opposition party. The PDI-P has often questioned government policies, which is vital for a healthy democracy. If she does run for the presidency, it will provide voters with a genuine alternative.
The Golkar Party, on the other hand, must put its internal house in order. It appears at the moment that not all senior party members are on the same page or share the same vision. If this goes on for too much longer, it might just rip the party apart, which would be a loss to the country.
------------------------------------------
Before the Suspicions Really Set In, A Road Map for Carrying Out Elections
The Jakarta Globe
Friday, April 24, 2009
James Van Zorge
The cornerstone of any successful democracy is the conduct of free, transparent and fair elections. Any leader who ascends to power in a flawed election will find himself subject to allegations of being the perpetrator of foul play and, consequently, his legitimacy will be seriously lacking.
Therein lies the challenge for Indonesia’s relatively young and vibrant electoral democracy. The 2004 elections were, by any measure, a resounding success. But now there are warning signs the upcoming 2009 presidential elections could result in cries of protest by the losing contestants.
How Indonesia has come to this point is very clear. The tipping point was last year’s East Java gubernatorial elections, where there was evidence of massive, systematic fraud. Because the winner belonged to the president’s party and investigations into any wrongdoing were inexplicably blocked from taking place, it was quite natural that opposition parties believed the president, or at least his party’s chiefs, were preparing for more mischief in the April legislative elections. Given those deep suspicions and therefore expectations about what was in store for the future, the opposition was bound to interpret any flaws in the April polls as the result of electoral shenanigans.
Now, the two sides of the political aisle are in a tussle over what needs to be done next. Losers are preparing for legal battles, and President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono is saying that while there admittedly were flaws, the results should be accepted. If this is the trajectory moving ahead, there is little chance of reconciliation.
Foremost, there should be a recognition that attempts to contest the legislative elections through the courts are unlikely to result in any sort of closure. By all accounts, the adjudicating bodies are poorly prepared to handle the deluge of cases being filed and it is reasonable to assume they will be subject, in some instances, to corrupt judges. Hence the court system is bound to fail in being seen as either capable or fair in delivering verdicts, and could result in acrimonious accusations that run on endlessly.
Another complication comes about because election monitors were allowed to observe only the tabulation of votes. It will be nearly impossible to prove or disprove any fraudulent behavior that may have occurred before the counting began — which is precisely when fraud was most likely.
Some of the losing parties might consider displaying their displeasure by other means, such as organizing protests in the streets. The opposition should realize this would be an imprudent and unwise tactic, as well, for it could result in a large dose of political uncertainty, possibly political paralysis and under a situation of heightened emotions, violence. In the end, nobody would benefit, and the electorate would view the opposition as spoilers as opposed to public leaders with the national interest in mind.
Rather than rely upon legal or extralegal means and make a tenuous situation only worse, there is another option: agreeing to agree that the elections were flawed, but rather than worrying about who was wrong and how to tweak the final count in the legislative elections, both the opposition and the government should work toward finding a mutually agreeable and practical road map that will reinstill trust and therefore ensure a successful presidential election.
Before a road map can be created, however, a commitment to shared interests must emerge. Yudhoyono must realize the presidential elections need to be viewed by all of the stakeholders as legitimate, and the only way to achieve that goal is to engage the opposition in improving the process; if he doesn’t, he could be facing a Pyrrhic victory in July. At the same time, leaders of opposition parties must momentarily rise above their base instincts as politicians by refraining from opportunism and instead commit themselves toward the goal of having better elections as opposed to attempting to turn the tables on Yudhoyono — otherwise, they will be handing the presidency to the incumbent on a silver platter.
The outlines of a road map for better elections are, at this point, fairly obvious.
First, the president should take the initiative in demanding that senior members of the General Elections Commission, or KPU, resign from their posts. For sure, this is a move that will not meet protests from any corner of the political spectrum, and it would signal to the opposition and the electorate alike that the president is sincere in addressing one of the core problems underlying the April elections: incompetence.
Before he even has the time to ponder the merits and disadvantages of telling the KPU to hand in their resignation slips, Yudhoyono should stay focused on one question — what will happen if he allows commission heads to stay in place and serious flaws appear again in the July elections? Could he then
credibly shift the blame away from himself? Certainly not.
Of course, the devil is in the details. If the election commission honchos are shown the door, with whom should they be replaced? Surely, new and more capable hands can be found, but the issue is, who should propose them and how can one devise a selection process that will ensure buy-in from all of the major parties with a stake in the elections?
A second pillar of a working road map should be ensuring a substantial improvement in the accuracy of voter lists. Problems with voter lists constituted most of the charges that the April elections were illegitimate. Whereas the original data on eligible voters came from the Home Ministry, it is the responsibility of the national and local elections commissions to ensure that the lists are revised and updated. Furthermore,
the elections commission was responsible to share those lists with all political parties before polling day, but many of the parties say they never saw those lists.
A reasonable question is, then, having failed miserably at this task the first time around, what is to guarantee the elections commission will succeed in fulfilling its obligations for the July elections?
Obviously, there are no guarantees, but instead of leaving the commission’s future performance in the hands of blind faith, Yudhoyono and the opposition should agree on a set of procedures, milestones and timetables for the commission to hand over improved lists. Furthermore, both sides should agree that the elections should not be allowed to proceed until all parties have been given complete lists with sufficient time to inspect them for errors.
Finally, the opposition should demand, and the president should agree, to invite foreign election monitoring agencies to observe the elections with an open-ended mandate, enough to ensure the integrity of the presidential elections are safeguarded within standards as normally prescribed by the international community of electoral democracies.
Without a doubt, having reputable organizations monitor the elections is the most important part of a road map toward success. The accuracy of voter lists is important, and they need to be reasonably improved over the last elections, but most contenders could probably tolerate some degree of error. Fraud, however, is another issue. All political parties need to be confident that there is little room for cheating. Inviting monitors from organizations such as the Carter Center and the European Union should be standard practice. Even the United States, which enjoys a mature, consolidated democracy, has foreign monitors present during its presidential elections. Indonesia would be wise to do the same.
James Van Zorge is a Jakarta-based political analyst.
------------------------------------------
Indonesia’s Do-It-Yourself Campaign
The New York Times
Sunday, May 3, 2009
ENDY M. BAYUNI
Op-Ed Contributor
Jakarta, Indonesia
IN the days and weeks after the April 9 parliamentary elections in Indonesia, employees at the mental hospital in Surakarta, in Central Java, have been working double shifts. “We’ve been overwhelmed with 200 patients a day,” said the hospital spokeswoman, Dyah Srimarwati. Other mental institutions are
reporting a similar surge. Losing candidates in the election apparently account for the bulk of new patients.
All sorts of sad stories have emerged: a losing candidate in West Java hanged herself; another on Bali died of a heart attack after the polling stations announced the results; and when one man on Sulawesi discovered that most of his neighbors had not voted for him, he cut off public access to a well on his property.
About one million people from 44 parties were contesting up to 50,000 seats in the national, provincial and local legislatures. So you had an average of a 1 in 20 chance of winning. And you couldn’t expect help from your political party. You recruited your own volunteers, organized your own town hall meetings and raised your own money. If you were of limited means, this meant selling everything you had — your house, your car, your lifetime savings, even your parents-in-law’s property if you could persuade them. Or you just went deep into debt. No wonder people got very depressed as soon as they learned they had lost.
This is only Indonesia’s third free and fair election since General Suharto resigned in 1998, but April’s election, along with those in 1999 and 2004, have proven to skeptics that democracy can be practiced here, in the world’s largest Muslim nation. Over the past decade, Islamist parties have not done particularly well; most Indonesians, including the majority of Muslims, obviously feel more comfortable with the secular
parties. (Preliminary counts indicate three secular-centrist parties, including the Democratic Party of the incumbent president, Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, will dominate the national Parliament.)
That said, things have not always gone smoothly. Although the election commission said 171 million people were registered, millions learned on April 9 that they could not vote because their names were not on the rolls. It’s not clear yet how many were disenfranchised, but if the number is sufficiently large, say 20 million or more, it would raise serious questions about the credibility of the polls and of the elected government.
Those who did vote found the task overwhelming. Typically, a voter would get four ballot papers, each as wide and almost as tall as an adult body, with the names and symbols of the parties and the lists of candidates fielded by the parties in their respective electoral districts. In my own confusion about whom to vote for, I went for women — we have not yet had a female lawmaker convicted for corruption, so I thought that was a good bet.
The names that stood out on the ballots were not of politicians but of celebrities and comedians. Not surprisingly, some of them won and some seasoned politicians lost or may lose their seats — for instance, a popular Jakarta comedian named Mandra is leading the House speaker, Agung Laksono. Presumably, after what seems like endless scandals, many people feel that if you are going to send a bunch of clowns to Parliament, then you may as well send in the real clowns this time. At least we will all get a good laugh.
Endy M. Bayuni is the chief editor of The Jakarta Post.
---------------------------------------------
Rights body forms team over flawed voter lists
The Jakarta Post [web site]
April 22, 2009
The National Commission on Human Rights (Komnas HAM) has set up a team to investigate why so many people were left off the fixed voter lists for the April 9 legislative elections.
“We have appointed a three-member team with high competency in the fields of politics and law to investigate the alleged fraud that took place during the last elections,” commission deputy chairman Ridha Saleh said Tuesday.
However, he declined to name the team members, saying only they were an academic, a former General Elections Commission (KPU) member, and a former university rector.
“We’ve also set a deadline for the team to publish their findings by May 10,” he said.
The commission claims the recent elections were rigged and that there were systemic violations that led to millions of eligible voters being disenfranchised.
Komnas HAM put the number of unregistered voters at an estimated 46 million, while political activists claim there were around 10 million voters left off the final lists.
“This fraud is a violation of political civil rights, but before we can call it a gross violation of human rights, we need to investigate it first,” Ridha said.
He added the commission would also summon KPU members and Home Minister Mardiyanto in the near future to explain the problems with the flawed voter lists.
Komnas HAM chairman Ifdhal Kasim previously said that if these errors were intentional, further investigations and even trials would be necessary.
During the recent polls, the commission monitored several conflict-prone regions, including Papua, Ambon, Aceh, and Poso in Central Sulawesi, as well as border areas like Atambua in East Nusa Tenggara and Nunukan in East Kalimantan.
The official rights body focused its monitoring on marginal groups, such as internally displaced people, migrant workers, prisoners and hospitalized mentally ill patients.
It found the majority of voters in those areas were unregistered or were not allowed to vote, even though their names were on the lists.
Several civil society groups, such as the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), the Indonesian Legal Aid Association (PBHI) and the Indonesian Women’s Association for Justice (LBH APIK), have taken legal action to challenge the recent election results by filing a civil lawsuit on April 14 against the KPU and the
government for preventing citizens from voting in the recent elections.
Politicians have also criticized the legislative elections, calling them “the worst elections” among all polls ever held — including in 1999 and 2004 — since former president Soeharto’s downfall. They claimed more irregularities occurred this year than in the two previous polls.
They issued a joint statement challenging the poll results after a meeting at former president Megawati Soekarnoputri’s house on Jl. Teuku Umar, Central Jakarta, on April 14.
Prominent figures in attendance included Prabowo Subianto of the Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra), National Mandate Party (PAN) member Toto Daryanto, United Development Party (PPP) member Rusdi Hanafi, Crescent Star Party (PBB) chief patron Yusril Ihza Mahendra, and Prosperous Peace Party (PDS) member Ferry B. Siregar.
---------------------------------------------
NGOs Sue Govt Over Voter List Fiasco
The Jakarta Post
April 23, 2009
Eny Wulandari
Several NGOs on Thursday filed for a citizen lawsuit to the Central Jakarta District Court, demanding the General Election Commission (KPU) and government be held responsible for millions of citizens who lost their rights to vote during legislative election on April 9.
The NGOs that have filed for the lawsuit are the Indonesian Legal Aid Foundation (YLBHI), the Legal Aid Foundation of the Indonesian Women's Association for Justice (LBH APIK), the General Election Independent Observers Committee (KIPP) and the Indonesian Legal Aid and Human Rights Association (PBHI).
YLBHI chairman Patra M. Zen told said the KPU and the government had violated article 299 of the General Elections Law by insisting on carrying out the general election despite lingering problems that could jeopardize the outcome of the voting.
The problems include KPU’s failure to list some 40 million people as eligible voters.
“Both the KPU and the government pressed on with the elections despite many disputes on the voters lists, which led to millions of people losing their right to vote,” he said.
He said that the petitioners had to file a legal lawsuit after failing to ask KPU and the government to carry out another round of elections to accommodate voters who were not listed in the initial voters list.
“On April 14, we gave a notification to the KPU and the government to conduct delayed elections within one week. But up to April 21, they did not do it,” he said.
In its lawsuit, he added, the petitioners were also asking for the KPU and the government to suspend conducting presidential election prior to the delayed elections.
“We have demanded the KPU and the government to apologize, over the matter, to the public,” he said. (ewd)
---------------------------------------------
Calls for KPK to Broaden Its Probe Into Poll Fiasco
The Jakarta Globe
May 2, 2009
Civil society organizations on Friday called for the Corruption Eradication Commission to investigate election commission higher-ups over procurements for the legislative polls.
The organizations, under the umbrella of the Independent Monitoring Organization, said it was not right that the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) should investigate only employees from the General Elections Commission (KPU) while ignoring the commissioners themselves.
The organization added that the KPK’s probe should not just concentrate on electronic vote tabulation procurements.
“The procurement process also involved KPU commissioners,” Arif Nur Alam, director of Indonesia Budget Center, said on Friday. “And these commissioners should also be responsible for the procurement as it was under their supervision.”
The Corruption Eradication Commission on Thursday summoned three officials from the KPU over technical problems in the electronic vote-counting system used in the April 9 legislative polls.
The system — which the KPU says cost Rp 40 billion ($3.8 million), in contrast to assertions by the KPK that it cost Rp 103 billion — was designed to provide unofficial results ahead of the finalization of the official manual vote count on May 9.
The KPU had planned to use the system to count 80 percent of the ballots by April 20, but it had barely counted 10 percent of the about 130 million eligible votes by this deadline, prompting an investigation by the KPK.
The day after the deadline, the KPK opened a corruption probe into the use of the system to determine whether the process to procure the technology had been carried out in an honest, transparent manner.
Arif also said the KPK should investigate other procurements by the elections commission, including ballot papers.
“There were many misprinted ballot papers that could not be used, as well as cases of switched ballot papers, which meant the KPU had to reprint the papers,” he said.
“The KPK should investigate whether there were irregularities in the ballot paper procurement.”
Roy Salam, a researcher at the Indonesian Forum for Budget Transparency, said the KPK should also investigate the inefficient budget usage for voter education programs.
“There were several areas in which KPU spending appears excessive,” Roy said.
Sulastio, chairman of the Indonesian Parliamentary Center, said the KPK should speed up its investigation to prevent any attempts to destroy evidence.
“The KPK should move quickly to investigate these issues as there may be efforts to hide or change the data,” he said.
KPK spokesman Johan Budi said that “at the moment there are no plans to summon any of the [KPU] commissioners, but if there is a need to do so, we will.”
--------------------------------------------
RI's Elections: The Regional Dividend
The Jakarta Post
April 22, 2009
Michael Vatikiotis
Op-Ed
Singapore
The recently held general election in Indonesia demonstrated convincingly that plural societies in Southeast Asia can be trusted to express their popular will without resorting to violent conflict. For many years it was argued by conservative ruling elites that the fullest expression of popular sovereignty through untrammelled electoral processes posed a threat to nation building as it would allow groups of people in conflict
with the state to destabilize society and eventually vote their way to separation.
But in this case, for the first time in Indonesian history, regional political parties were allowed to contest the election in former war-torn province of Aceh. Whilst there are lingering fears that the sizable mandate won by the Aceh Party could be used to push for a referendum on independence (and evidence of attempts by the Indonesian military to undermine the new regional party), it is worth noting that incumbent President
Susilo Bambang Yudho-yono's Democrat Party also scored well in the polls, and the post election rhetoric of the Aceh Party has only called for a full implementation of the terms for peace agreed upon under the 2005 Memorandum of Understanding.
What this means is that Indonesia's territorial integrity is no longer as fragile as it was once thought to be. One of the biggest fears once Indonesia's transition to democracy was that it would lead to the country flying apart.
Instead, democracy has reduced levels of internal conflict and strengthened Indonesia's territorial integrity. It can't be a complete coincidence that the conflict in Aceh was settled barely a year after the 2004 election in which Indonesians felt for the first time that they were directly electing their leader. Many of the demands for autonomy and self government made by the Aceh Freedom Movement had been granted to every province under liberal decentralization legislation implemented after 1999 under democratic rule.
After three peaceful elections in the past decade, it is now important for Indonesia to impress upon its regional neighbors that the democratic political process is a significant treatment for chronic conflict within society.
That decentralization and autonomy don't fuel separatism, people can be trusted to manage their own affairs at the local level and take rational decisions at the ballot box. If Indonesia was to start investing in the propagation of these ideas, it could contribute to regional peace and security.
There are indications that Indonesia is keen to set a regional example. Last year, President Yudho-yono launched the Bali Democracy Forum. Foreign Minister Hassan Wirajuda said the Forum was "aimed at enshrining democracy on the strategic agenda of Asia." This in turn is part of a broader Indonesian effort to
push for concrete discussion of critical peace and security issues in regional fora, such as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations.
This of course will be an uphill struggle because the majority of ASEAN member states shy away from regional discussions on peace and security, let alone internal political arrangements. Therefore, to become an effective catalyst for political reform in the region, Indonesia must push harder for a significant change to prevailing norms of diplomacy within the 10 ASEAN member states. To do this, Indonesia will need act boldly, going beyond rhetorical flourishes and invest in some institutional capacity building.
Indonesian analysts have been outspoken critics of the newly adopted ASEAN Charter, doubting that other member states will support the full implementation of its provisions for dispute resolution or respect the charter's embrace of democracy and human rights principles. But the commentary has been long on rhetoric and short on practical suggestions about how to prevent this happening.
The government can help by channelling more resources into effective public diplomacy and reaching out to regional partners. It would be inappropriate and counter-productive for Indonesia to rely on traditional Western donors to underwrite the advocacy of democracy.
As part of this program of capacity building, Indonesia could usefully increase its level of support for the ASEAN Secretariat, which is located in Jakarta. Whilst additional funding for the Secretariat must be agreed upon by all member states, support could take the form of workshops and retreats with the objective of strengthening regional capacity for implementation of the ASEAN Charter.
For their part, Indonesia's neighbours would do well to change their perception of Indonesia. The country has turned a corner in terms of nation building and is unlikely to fall apart. Despite all the fears of the past few years, extremists and dangerous radicals have been pushed to the margins and have not gained ground at the ballot box.
Yes, Indonesia is a complex, plural society, which to some of the region's more homogenous societies is often seen as menacing in itself. But its people are free, increasingly participate in governing their own affairs, and are largely at peace with one another. For Indonesia to be a haven of peace, freedom and
stability in modern Southeast Asia sets an example worth following.
The writer is Asia Regional Director of the Geneva-based Centre for Humanitarian Dialogue.
----------------------------------------------
A Mixed Bag for Aceh’s Local Parties in Elections
The Jakarta Globe
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Nurdin Hasan
Banda Aceh. The Aceh Party, founded by former guerilla fighters from the Free Aceh Movement, or GAM, is the only one of six local political parties in the province to clear the 5 percent electoral threshold guaranteeing their future, a political analyst from a local university said on Wednesday.
“Only the Aceh Party will pass the electoral threshold,” Syiah Kuala University political analyst Muhammad Jafar said here.
“The other five local parties in the 2009 elections will not be able to participate in the elections five years from now because they didn’t get the 5 percent it takes to pass the electoral threshold.”
The Aceh Party has dominated the vote tally for the provincial legislature, or DPRA, garnering 44.27 percent of the votes that have been counted.
The Aceh Independent Election Commission, or KIP, was still counting votes on Wednesday night but expected to complete the process today. The threshold is spelled out in the law on Aceh governance and a 2007 regulation.
Failure to meet the threshold means disqualification from participating in the 2014 elections, unless a party changes its name and registers as a new party with the regional office the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights.
As well as 37 national parties, six local parties took part in the April 9 legislative elections in Aceh.
Besides the Aceh Party, they are the Aceh People’s Independent Voice Party, or SIRA; the Aceh People’s Party, or PRA; the Sovereign Aceh Party, or PDA; the United Aceh Party, or PBA; and the Safe and Prosperous Aceh Party, or PAAS.
Aceh is the only province in Indonesia allowed to have local parties, based on the 2005 peace deal between the government GAM.
“With 69 seats in the DPRA, a local party can only pass [the electoral threshhold] if it wins three seats, or 5 percent of all 645 seats in the 23 district and municipality councils,” Jafar said.
“So far, only the Aceh Party has been able to do this. The likelihood of the rest of the local parties passing the threshold is slim. If they are to participate in the 2014 elections, they have to change their names and start anew.”
Jafar said he believed the decision-making process at the DPRA would be improved with the Aceh Party holding the majority. “Legislative decision-making will be easier with a single majority,” he said.
“Relations with the Aceh government will also be very good because the governor himself is from the Aceh Party, allowing for a mutually supportive and synergistic relation between the legislature and the government.”
However, Jafar said there might be communication problems between the DPRA and the central government, since local Acehnese parties did not have party branches in Jakarta.
He said it was important that there be intensive communication between the DPRA and the 13 Acehnese members of the central House of Representatives, to ensure that the province’s interests were sufficiently represented in Jakarta.
------------------------------------------
A Deeper Look into the Recent Elections in Aceh
The Jakarta Post
April 28, 2009
by Shane Joshua Barter, New York
Op-Ed
On the ninth of April 2009, Indonesia held its third set of legislative elections since the collapse of Soeharto's New Order. Numerous political sagas continue to unfold, including concerns over the implications of the first legislative elections in post-conflict Aceh.
The core compromises leading to the Helsinki Agreement were that the Free Aceh Movement (GAM) would drop its demand for independence in exchange for substantive autonomy and the right to organize as a political party.
Through its powerful Transition Committee, the former rebels formed Partai Aceh (PA). PA quickly became visible throughout the province, symbolized by their variation of the GAM flag. Along with PA, five other local parties were also established.
In the months leading up to Aceh's elections, there were numerous instances of violence, mostly against PA leaders. There was a great deal at stake in Aceh's elections for the province and the country. Would a Partai Aceh victory signal a renewed call for separatism?
There were four elections held in Aceh on April 9 for the Regional Representatives Council (DPD), the provincial legislature (DPR-A), district and city legislatures (DPR-K), and the House of Representatives (DPR-RI). The DPD elections were the least politically charged of the four. Candidates ran as individuals, campaigning more on ethnic cues than platforms for these largely symbolic positions.
The DPR-A and DPR-K elections have received the most attention, the two races featuring local political parties.
Though the results continue to trickle in, it is clear that, using the organizational machine of the former rebels, Partai Aceh dominated.
Local parties did not win these elections, the PA did; early returns suggest that other local parties won between 0.7 to 2.3 percent of the popular vote.
Several parties, including other local ones, have reported PA intimidation at the polls. There is little doubt that PA dominance is partially owed to intimidation by former GAM members and funding from grey-market construction contracts. But even with these significant shortcomings, there can be no doubt that the election was a resounding indicator of continued rebel popularity in much of Aceh.
However, this does not mean that the election as a whole went the way PA wanted, and it does not translate into a mandate for separatism. Looking at district results, one finds the emergence of distinct voting blocs.
PA dominated in the north and west coasts, which are the most densely populated, which accounts for PA's strong polling in the provincial aggregate. And, not coincidentally, the coastal regions are the most ethnically homogeneous. But some contests remain too close to call.
In Aceh Besar and the two races in the southeast, PA looks to a whisker ahead of President Yudhoyono's Partai Demokrat (PD). A third cluster saw PD defeat PA in local elections.
In the capital city of Banda and Sabang Island, PD gained more votes than PA in both sets of local elections. PD also appears to have defeated PA in three highland districts, with Golkar victorious in Bener Meriah, and PD also looks to have won the all three pairs of elections in the southwest corner of the province.
So while the populous north and west coasts supported PA with extreme devotion, the northwest, centre, and south of the province did not. Ethnically diverse provinces were either divided or supported Indonesian parties.
Beyond the regional variation in support for Partai Aceh, a second story which has not received much attention thus far concerns the party which placed second.
Disregarding a long-standing local tradition, Acehnese voters did not vote for Islamic parties, nor did they support Golkar. In all but two DPR-A and DPR-K contests, President Yudhoyono's Partai Demokrat (PD) won or placed second.
Support for SBY is most apparent in the fourth set of elections, the DPR-RI contests. PD won the popular vote in all but one district, and did so with over 50 percent of the vote, rivalling the overwhelming victories of the PA in the DPR-A and DPR-K. For a new party with few roots in Aceh, this is a strong endorsement of a President who is widely credited with ending the conflict.
DPR-RI voting shows an important difference between the two zones of PA control. In the west coast, PD ruled DPR-RI tallies, gaining similar numbers in national elections as PA in local elections.
This suggests that voters in the west coast simultaneously support the former rebels and the peace agreement. But things are very different along the north coast, the lone region where the elections should be seen as supporting separatism.
Here, even though PD won the DPR-RI vote, there is a considerable gap between the number of ballots cast in national and local elections. Although the final count is ongoing, it appears that voters here supported Partai Aceh, but spoiled their ballot for national elections, sending a clear message to Banda and to Jakarta.
In coffee shops around Aceh, the topic of conversation is the same one heard in army barracks around the country and in the villas of Menteng. Does the victory of Partai Aceh signal a renewed call for separatism? PA won 85 percent of the vote in some regions, winning nearly half the votes in the province as a whole. PA will control the provincial legislature while another former rebel controls the executive branch.
In this article, I suggest this victory is not as clear-cut as it appears. PA dominated in the north and west coasts, with PD approaching or surpassing the PA in the capitol, the interior, and the south.
Even in PA strongholds, SBY's blueshirts came in second. In the national elections, it was PD that dominated. Only on the north coast, where locals not only supported PA, but also refused to cast a national vote, should the results be taken as support for separatism.
As a whole, rather than showing support for independence, this election delivered support for the country's incumbent ruler, and by extension, the recent peace.
As a unit, Aceh's election results support the status quo, but with the spectre of a renewed conflict should Jakarta and the military come up short.
The writer is PhD Candidate, Department of Political Science, University of British Columbia.
------------------------------------------
It’s Official: Aceh Party Secures Majority Of Seats in Provincial Legislative Council
The Jakarta Globe
May 1, 2009
Nurdin Hasan
Banda Aceh. The announcement on Thursday of official results from the April 9 election in Aceh produced no surprises, with the local Aceh Party walking away with the majority of seats in the provincial legislative council, as had been expected.
The final results, which were announced by the Aceh Independent Election Commission, or KIP, after it finished counting votes from the province’s 23 districts and municipalities, showed the Aceh Party had secured 33 of the 69 seats in the provincial council.
From a total of 2,146,141 valid ballots, the Aceh Party received
1,007,173 votes, or 46.93 percent. Trailing in a distant second was the Democratic Party of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono, which had 232,728 votes, or 10.84 percent, followed by Golkar Party with 142,411 votes, or 6.64 percent. The National Mandate Party, or PAN, finished fourth with 93,060 votes, or 3.87
percent, while the Prosperous Justice Party, or PKS, received 81,529 votes, or 3.80 percent.
While it scored an overwhelming victory, the Aceh Party’s own projections showed it gaining more votes. Aceh Party spokesman Adnan Beuransyah had earlier estimated that his party would clinch 36 seats in the provincial legislative council.
“After the counting was completed, the Aceh Party apparently received fewer votes than other parties in several electoral areas,” Adnan said.
The Democratic Party secured 10 seats in the provincial council, Golkar eight, PAN five, PKS four and the United Development Party, or PPP, three.
The remaining seats were split between the Aceh Mandate Party, or PDA, another local party, and several national parties.
The April 9 legislative elections were the first to be held following the truce signed by the government and the Free Aceh Movement, or GAM, in 2005. Under the deal, Aceh is the only province in the country allowed to have locally-based political parties.
Six local parties competed with 37 national parties in the elections in the province, although only two of the local parties managed to get seats in the legislature — the Aceh Party and the Aceh Mandate Party.
The Aceh Party, founded by former GAM guerrillas, secured most of its support in former strongholds of the group, in the north and east of the province.
A member of KIP, Akmal Abzal, said that his commission would hold another plenary meeting before May 17, after the completion of the vote count from Aceh for the House of Representatives in Jakarta by the General Elections Commission, or KPU.
------------------------------------------
The Straits Times (Singapore)
Friday, April 24, 2008
John McBeth, Senior Writer
THE legislative elections in Indonesia's two separatist-inclined regions have thrown up two very different outcomes: one free of unrest or controversy, the other under a cloud of electoral shenanigans. The politics in the provinces that bookend the sprawling archipelago are very different.
In Aceh, President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono's Democrat Party is gaining about 40 per cent of the votes for the national legislature, while the Aceh Party, rooted in the former rebel Free Aceh Movement (GAM), has a 47 per cent hold on the provincial legislative council.
In Papua, where the former ruling Golkar party still wields surprising influence, electoral observers believe there were widespread irregularities, including a gross over-supply of ballot papers.
It is clear the Democrats were always going to do well in Aceh, mainly because many voters feel that a second term for Dr Yudhoyono will ensure the historic 2005 peace agreement remains in place.
But the outcome seems almost tailor-made - and may well have been, following reports of a pre-election meeting in Medan between the President and Aceh Transitional Committee chairman Muzakkir Manaf.
Political sources say the former GAM military chief later sent a text message to his four former regional commanders urging them to spread the word through GAM's village networks to vote for the Democrats. Though there is no formal alliance, the sources say Mr Manaf understood the benefits of having Dr Yudhoyono's now-dominant party as an ally.
The meeting is believed to have taken place in February when the President was on his way to Banda Aceh, where he made a point of warning all parties, including the military, to leave their 'old point of view' behind.
Military and intelligence officials had expressed concerns that if the Aceh Party made a strong showing at the polls, the resulting administration might be tempted to openly challenge the central government. It is not clear whether it was solely tensions between the military and former GAM rebels that lay behind a series of gun and grenade attacks in the lead up to the polls, but they have quickly tailed off.
'What the President has been saying to all sides is let's try and make sure everyone comes out of this looking like a winner,' says one Acehnese analyst. Indeed, from Dr Yudhoyono's standpoint, that's exactly what seems to have happened.
Eight of the 23 Aceh districts have yet to submit returns, but preliminary results for the provincial legislature show the Aceh Party and the Democrats topping the polls in every other constituency, with the Democrats only leading in Banda Aceh and West Aceh.
Similarly, in the elections for the national legislature, the Democrats have a commanding lead in in all of the reporting districts, particularly in once-troubled Bireuen on the northern coast where the Aceh Party won 97 per cent of the vote in last year's district elections.
The Aceh Party is almost certainly the only one of six local political parties to clear the 5 per cent electoral threshold, which guarantees seats in the provincial legislature. The others never got close.
'It is a vote to keep the peace process alive,' notes one analyst.
While Vice-President and Golkar chairman Jusuf Kalla played a key role in pushing through the peace accords, Golkar itself has reaped few of the peace dividends because of its previous association with the repressive Suharto regime.
The Community for Aceh Resources Development estimates voter turnout in Aceh was a credible 77 per cent, better than the national average of 72 per cent.
Comparative figures will be harder to come by in Papua, where an aide to Governor Barnabus Suebu told The Straits Times that the election commission distributed as many 2.1 million ballots in a region with only 1.3 million eligible voters. Despite that, a large number of people were left off the rolls. One official said at least 25 people in his 70-strong church congregation were prevented from voting.
The most stunning result so far has been in West Papua province where the Golkar party has been leading by 40 per cent to 52 per cent - a huge increase over the 24 per cent it won in 2004. What makes the result even more remarkable is that the provincial governor, Mr Abraham Atururi, stood for the Indonesian Democratic Party - Struggle and only three of the nine newly elected bupatis, or district chiefs, are from Golkar.
Mr Muridan Widjojo, head of Papuan research at the Indonesian Institute of Social Sciences, puts some of the former ruling party's success down to the influence of sitting lawmaker Robert Joppy Kardinal, a prominent businessman in the port city of Sorong. Mr Kardinal is a former member of the New Order
strong-arm group Permuda Pancasila.
Golkar is also reported to be leading with 20 per cent of the vote in neighbouring Papua province, slightly less than it polled five years ago. But weeks after the election, it is one of only two provinces whose results have yet to appear on the General Elections Commission website.
thane.cawdor@gmail.com
---------------------------------------------
Activists’ Families Warn Major Parties of Mixing With Rights Violators
The Jakarta Globe
Friday, April 24, 2009
Markus Junianto Sihaloho
Families of activists missing since 1997 have called on candidates hoping to run in the July presidential election to avoid cooperating with parties led by individuals linked to past human rights violations.
Sipon, the wife of Wiji Thukul, a poet who has been missing since antigovernment protests in 1997, said at a press conference in Jakarta on Thursday that some political parties had demonstrated their intentions to resolve all past human rights violations.
“We have seen that during the 2004-2009 parliamentary period, parties like the PDI-P and PAN have supported our cause,” Sipon said, referring to the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle and the National Mandate Party, respectively.
PDI-P chairwoman Megawati Sukarnoputri, who has publicly announced her plan to run in the July 8 presidential election, has been holding meetings with Wiranto and Prabowo Subianto, both former military generals, about a possible coalition. Both Wiranto, who was a military chief when the antigovernment protests started, and Prabowo, former commander of the Army’s feared Special Forces, or Kopassus, have also held talks with PAN.
Thursday’s press conference was also attended by Tuti Koto, the mother of Yani Afri, who has been missing since 1997; Sumarsih, the mother of missing student Wawan; Suciwati, the widow of prominent human rights campaigner Munir Saib Thalib, who died of arsenic poisoning on a Garuda flight from Jakarta to Amsterdam in 2004; and Maria da Silva, a victim of human rights violations in East Timor.
Sipon said the families were worried about PDI-P’s political motives, including the meetings with Wiranto and Prabowo. Wiranto is chairman of the People’s Conscience Party, or Hanura, and Prabowo is chairman of the Great Indonesia Movement Party, or Gerindra.
“It is a fact that Prabowo and Wiranto have been linked to past human rights violations, particularly to the kidnapping of student activists and pro-democracy activists in 1997 and 1998, and human rights violations in East Timor,” Sipon said.
They also criticized President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s Democratic Party, which has held coalition talks with the Nation Functional Party, or PKPB, headed by former Army chief Hartono.
“When all the coalitions are brought to the parliament, it means all efforts to settle past human rights cases are back to square one,” Sipon said.
Reacting to the appeal, Tjahjo Kumolo, a member of PDI-P’s central board, said on Thursday that despite its political ties with Gerindra and Hanura, his party was committed to supporting the victims of past human rights violations.
Tjahjo said that everyone, including the families of the victims, should separate legal cases from the political motives of parties.
However, he also said that none of the former generals has been found guilty of human rights violations by a court of law.
“So when such figures come to your house, as a host, how can you reject them?” Tjahjo asked, defending Megawati’s meetings with Prabowo and Wiranto at her house.
Asked if the PDI-P would consider such political figures as potential vice presidential candidates in the July election, Tjahjo said it would be decided at the party’s special national meeting scheduled for Saturday.
-------------------------------------------
Human Rights in Indonesia are Threatened
TEMPO Interactive, Jakarta, May 1: Human rights activists said that a presidential candidate who has a background on human rights violations in the past will hurt the democratic process in Indonesia. They mentioned Prabowo Subianto from the Great Indonesia Movement Party (Gerindra) and Wiranto from the
People's Conscience Party (Hanura) as candidates with this background. Prabowo is allegedly related to the riot on May 1998 while Wiranto with the Semanggi tragedy.
“It will make the democratic process recede. We will need two or three more periods to rebuild it,” said economist Faisal Basri at a press conference yesterday. “Their candidacies will trigger authorization,” he added.
Cultural observer, Goenawan Mohamad, suggested voters to consider a candidate who can unveil the Semanggi and Trisakti riots, the murder case over activist Munir, and one who is anti corruption. Suciwati, Munir's wife, said that she has not seen any candidates with a willingness to uncover human rights
violations in the past.
Hanura's secretary general, Yus Usman Sumanegara, objected with a statement that Wiranto is related to human rights violations in the past. “That's a misleading campaign,” Yus said.
-------------------------------------------
Winters says Golkar class act soap opera
The Jakarta Post [web site]
April 28, 2009
Citizens and political analysts can always expect world class soap-opera entertainment from the Golkar Party, according to Jeffrey Winters, a political-economy professor of the Northwestern University in Chicago, who is also an expert on Indonesia.
"Golkar has been providing high quality entertainment in every general election taking place after the reformation era," he told The Jakarta Post in Jakarta Tuesday.
"What makes the party entertaining is its effort in adapting to the current political reality," he added.
According to Winters, Golkar is still pretty much drugged out with its past glory during the New Order era under the rule of dictator Suharto.
"During that era, Golkar always won the elections with massive margin. The condition led the party to believe that it is really that good and attractive to voters," he said.
"What the party does not realize is that today's reality is far different from the past and the party's leaders still have a hard time to swallow this fact," he added.
The latest soap-opera the party performed was the on and off relationship with legislative election winner Democratic Party(PD).
Golkar's chairman and incumbent vice-president Jusuf Kalla, though his party came up short in the election, confidently declared that he would run for president last week.
Kalla's decision was initiated after incumbent President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono of PD insisted that Golkar named more than one vice-president candidate, which reduced Kalla's chance to be re-elected.
However, Golkar has returned to show a softer side towards PD recently after the party failed to establish a coalition deal with other parties such as the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P).
"Golkar's inconsistency shows what the party true ideology and credo - 'Please don't leave me'," Winters said.
"The party is practically under control of the incumbent. SBY holds Golkar like a stack of meat on a grill and it can do nothing about it," he added. (hdt)
------------------------------------------
Workers to see more hard times after elections
The Jakarta Post
April 28, 2009
The country's laborers will likely face another difficult period throughout the next five years as none of the presidential candidates or political parties represent their interests, a discussion concluded in Jakarta on Monday.
The director of the Jakarta Legal Aid Foundation (LBH), Asfinawati, said even though the winning political parties and presidential candidates had repeatedly pledged to treat businessmen and workers equally in their campaigns, it would not eventuate in any significant benefits for laborers.
"A promise to treat businessmen and workers equally is definitely a misleading concept. How can a worker on a low salary have the bargaining power to protest against their boss' decision?" she said.
"Laborers will always require government assistance to protect their rights and welfare."
Sastro, the national coordinator of the Indonesian Alliance for the Defence of Laborers (ABM), said many parties and presidential candidates had only feigned support for laborers in an attempt to attract voters.
"Many legislative and presidential candidates have suddenly begun acting like labor activists in their campaigns. They have lured workers with a promise to fight for their rights so that they can earn a better living," Sastro said.
"But as we have seen following the elections, the candidates have forgotten these promises and are busy making political coalitions," he said.With the global financial crisis continuing to make its impact felt this year, Sastro and Asfinawati predicted the upcoming administration would almost likely issue more pro-business policies at the expense of laborers as business and political interests become increasingly inseparable.
"Given this situation, it is now more urgent for the labor unions and the press to intensively observe how the upcoming administration treats business owners and workers," Sastro said, citing an example of a massive labor protest against a joint ministerial decree released last year.
The decree, which was issued by the minister of manpower and transmigration, the home minister, the trade minister and the industry minister on Oct. 22, 2008, stipulates that monthly minimum wages are to be set by companies through an arrangement by employers and workers, and fixed based on economic growth in
the respective regions.
The latest data from the Ministry of Manpower and Transmigration recorded that more than 44,000 workers were laid off in the period from last November to March 2009.
Without any indication of employment improving this year, similar mass layoffs could continue throughout the entire year.
Since no labor-based party won the parliamentary threshold of 2.5 percent of votes, Max Lane, an Australian labor observer who spoke at the discussion, urged Indonesian activists to establish a labor-based media to keep their ideas alive. (hwa)
-----------------------------------------------
Labor Coalition Endorses Yudhoyono, Cites Programs Benefiting the Poor
The Jakarta Globe
Monday, May 4, 2009
Dessy Sagita
Several labor unions came together on Sunday to declare their support for President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono’s bid for a second term in office.
“Today we declare a people’s coalition for SBY for president from 2009 to 2014,” said Jumhur Hidayat, chairman of the Indonesian Labor Union Confederation (Gaspermindo).
Addressing representatives from several of the alliance’s members — including groups representing fishermen, farmers, laborers and mobile street vendors — Jumhur said the coalition was created to garner support to continue some of Yudhoyono’s ongoing programs that helped low-income groups.
“Some programs have been proven to help many people and we would like that to continue because they still need some more time to achieve more significant results,” he said.
Citing the example of the National Community Empowerment Program (PNPM) and the direct cash assistance program, Jumhur rebuked criticisms by former President Megawati Sukarnoputri that they
wounded national pride and created a beggar mentality among the people.
“In a crisis like this, even the unemployed in some developed countries get direct cash assistance, let alone poor people in our country,” he said. “They really need it.”
Jumhur dismissed comments that the coalition might be seen as having started stumping for Yudhoyono ahead of the official campaign period, which begins on June 13.
“This is not a rally for the election, this is merely a declaration to announce our stand in the upcoming election,” he contended, saying that the coalition was established to unite Yudhoyono’s supporters, who were spread out and not yet organized.
“This coalition was made to gather society’s forces that have been overlooked by the political parties.”
Yusuf Solichin, chairman of Indonesian Fishermen’s Association, said his group’s support for Yudhoyono did not amount to blind devotion.
“Our support is not unconditional; if SBY breaks the law, we will withdraw our support immediately,” he said.
Yusuf said Indonesia was already on the right track with relatively stable security and minimal economic disruption despite the global financial crisis.
The coalition plans to rally supporters in all 33 provincial capitals, starting next week with a similar event to be held in Bandung in West Java.