Today
Jakarta
- 28 °C
Other Publications
Democracy must be effective, not expensive
Ignas Kleden , Jakarta | Thu, 09/25/2008 9:19 AM | Opinion
It is a matter of fact that both executive and legislative elections in Indonesia have become increasingly costly. This is certainly an unintended result that was beyond the expectation and imagination of those who gave their energy, time, courage and even their lives for the 1998 political reforms.
In those days the students went to the street while struggling against repression and physical threats from outside and fear and hesitation from within. That was the political price they had to pay for materializing their democratic aspirations. At that time no one apparently believed that what he or she was fighting for would be so expensive in terms of money in the present development of democracy.
Given the fact that for many years unbridled corruption has been an old lengthy story in this country, one cannot simplify the explanation for why money has become what primarily matters in Indonesian politics merely by referring and giving into the corrupt mentality.
Corruption might have contributed much to the venality of public officials and civil servants. Bureaucratic procedures are commonly understood and treated as business transactions.
However, one has to give special attention to the underlying election system and the related control mechanism in order to better understand why money becomes a decisive variable in the victory or the defeat of a candidate.
One of the reasons is obviously the mixed nature of an election system that is partly proportional and partly district-based. If an executive candidate has to compete in a purely district system he or she has only to raise funds for the operational costs of his or her campaign.
In the present mixed system, however, a political party is in the position to nominate an executive candidate (though there is a leeway for independent candidates, who have to face some other requirements and complications that will not be discussed in this article).
It goes without saying that a political party does not give its political support to a candidate for free. In most cases there is a certain “contribution” that should be paid by a candidate to the supporting political party, the amount of which nobody knows because it is a closed deal. If all things are open and transparent, this might be made subject to some social control and legal regulation that can keep the “contribution” from going beyond the limits of proportion and fairness.
In fact such a negotiation usually takes place behind closed doors to the extent that it can exceed by far the financial carrying capacity of a candidate who might come from among the economically average citizens.
The double cost that results from campaign operational costs and the “contribution” to a political party can be so high that only those who come from the business community or from the old established elite circle can afford it.
As a way out the candidate will manage to obtain additional funds through loans or other sources.
The higher an executive position, the larger the amount will be, which means a public official or a civil servant may not be able to pay it back with his or her own salary. In such a situation the temptation to make money by illegal means can become inevitable.
Suffice it to say, the system has made the election and the effort to become a politician highly costly. Those who enter the system cannot do otherwise but try to go by the rules of the game either legally (which is very rare) or illegally (which is so common).
The underlying logic is pretty simple: If you need a lot of money to obtain an executive position, you will in turn utilize your position to make money. On top of it, one will not only misuse the public position to serve one’s personal purposes in money matters, but he or she will be deprived of the necessary attention and energy to provide public services properly.
A big question looms large in front of us but surprisingly it remains always unnoticed: Can we manage to set up another election system that will not trap the interested citizens who want to become electoral candidates into unbearable financial burdens and unnecessary venal temptations?
It can be done technically as a matter of course, but it needs determined political will and serious political commitment especially from those who so far have benefited from the costly election system. Every correction requires a sacrifice which is not that easy for some people to give.
In order to enforce that commitment, rigorous legal regulations should be made. Ironically, however, only legislators, many of whom are deeply involved in the venal temptations they cannot resist, can produce those legal regulations. There is a vicious circle which makes any effort for improvement nothing but a desperate undertaking.
Unwanted corruption and expected sound political behavior are not only a matter of moral integrity, but also a matter of having a political and administrative system which can reduce the opportunity to divest public funds into one’s own pocket. The first feasible action is to bring those public officials and legislators who take illegal money into the court and to sentence them to the heaviest possible penalty.
At the same time efforts should be made to set up another election system that allows every interested citizen to embark upon a political campaign without feeling overburdened by money requirements which basically have nothing to do with the carrying out of their public services.
The writer, sociologist, is Chairman of Indonesian Community for Democracy (KID).
