TheJakartaPost

Please Update your browser

Your browser is out of date, and may not be compatible with our website. A list of the most popular web browsers can be found below.
Just click on the icons to get to the download page.

Jakarta Post

Kuskhrido Ambardi : No drastic change in the upcoming government

Indonesia, the world's third largest democracy after the United States and India, organized the legislative election on Thursday

Agustinus B da Costa (The Jakarta Post)
Jakarta
Sun, April 12, 2009

Share This Article

Change Size

Kuskhrido Ambardi : No drastic change in the upcoming government

Indonesia, the world's third largest democracy after the United States and India, organized the legislative election on Thursday. With 38 political parties (44 in Nanggroe Aceh Darussalam) it would be impossible to win a majority of the votes.

Thus, a coalition will be needed to form a government. The Jakarta Post talked with Kuskhrido Ambardi, the director of research at the Indonesian Survey Institute (LSI) about the issue recently. Here is the excerpt:

What kind of coalitions could emerge from this election?

I think one possibility is that coalitions will form just as they did five years ago after the 2004 elections. As long as Megawati Soekarnoputri's Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle *PDI-P* wants to forge a coalition with big parties like the Golkar Party or the United Development Party, it will be like 2004.

Now, the political parties are still waiting for the *official* results of the legislative election *to be announced by the General Elections Commission*.

Let's say Golkar garners 12 percent as in the previous election. The party may swing here and there but Golkar will make a rational choice. If the pairing of Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Jusuf Kalla is advantageous for both the Democratic Party and Golkar, it would be much safer than a coalition between the PDI-P and Golkar. Everyone is still awaiting the results. No party will close its door to a coalition.

What would be the basis of such coalitions? Would it be common platforms?

No, it would not be the platforms. If platforms were the basis of a coalition, it would not work, as the political parties have different platforms. Coalitions would instead be based on practical reasons.

Even political parties that we think oppose each other, such as the PDI-P and the PPP in the 1999 poll over the issue of a female president, they did get together in the past. *At that time, Megawati was the president and PPP chairman Hamzah Haz was the vice president.*

In the next election, the arena will be different. In the legislative election, political parties compete to garner or win the most votes, while in the presidential election *in July* they will compete for just two seats. These seats cannot be shared by all parties.

Will there be opposition groups?

No parties dare. First, because of our culture. It seems that to criticize and to oppose are not socially acceptable here, so they would not get support. Second, our Constitution gives strong powers to the House of Representatives vis-*-vis the government, so the president needs strong political backing in the House of Representatives.

Any elected president here would need a coalition, which is why coalitions become very important. The basic reason for coalitions is not shared vision or platforms but positions in the government or power sharing.

To date, we have not seen any difference between one coalition and another during the political campaigning. For example, there are the so-called "Golden Triangle" and "Golden Bridge" coalitions: What is the different between the two?

If we look at the five-point agreement between certain political parties *Golkar, the PDI-P and the PPP* - to build a strong government, to keep national integrity and to develop a people-oriented economy - we see that all political parties would agree on those issues.

If Golkar, the PDI-P and the PPP sign the agreement, other parties can sign too; the five points are general things that could be agreed upon by all parties. The issue here is not a political view but a power struggle to win the presidential and vice presidential seats.

Do you think such coalitions would be effective?

At the elite level, coalitions are effective only for the presidential election. At the grassroots level, however, coalitions are not effective. Megawati should have won the presidential seat in 2004, as she could unite the big political parties, the PDI-P and Golkar.

But in fact, the pairing of SBY and Kalla won the presidency. They were backed by the Democratic Party, the Prosperous Justice Party and the National Mandate Party in the second round.

The will of the elite is not reflected in the grass roots. Thus, for the grass roots a coalition is not effective *because the mass is politically fluid*.

What do you expect from the legislative election?

I worry that the quality of our legislators will decrease. Why? There are a few reasons. First, in previous elections political parties listed their legislative candidates based on capability, their understanding of platforms, vision, mission, etc. The candidates with the biggest score were placed in the first rank. As most parties followed this system, there was a "quality factor" in the candidates.

But in the 2009 elections, there is no scoring system. It is possible that the candidate at the top of the list may not be elected. On the contrary, candidates not at the top of the list have every chance of being elected. If we compare the two, the probability of mediocre candidates getting seats in the House will now be bigger as a result of the new system.

Second, there were 38 parties competing in the election and all of them looking for legislative candidates. The demand for legislative candidates was high, but the supply of qualified candidates was low.

Ultimately, political parties picked anyone simply to meet the requirements.

How would they work with the government?

The relationship between the legislative and executive branches is stipulated by law. There are three main responsibilities of parliament, namely, law making, budgeting and controlling the government.

They have to understand the issues and the problems before controlling the executive branch, what the government does, what kind of policies they issue.

If the quality of our legislators is not better than those elected in 2004, the quality of these checks and balances will decrease. They may be outspoken in the House, but their statements will lack substance.

Let us see the results from our legislators of the 2004-2009 term of office. Many laws have been filed with the Constitution Court for judicial review and some articles have been annulled. If the quality of our 2009-2014 legislators is not better than the quality of their predecessors, the number of judicial reviews will increase.

So what will the next government look like?

There will be no radical change. In the formation of the Cabinet, the President would still need a coalition. More support for the President would be better, because the President would not then be hassled by parliament.

What would change is the composition of the House and of the Cabinet. If the proportion of power in parliament changes, say the Democratic Party wins more votes, it will certainly get more posts in the governmental Cabinet.

{

Your Opinion Matters

Share your experiences, suggestions, and any issues you've encountered on The Jakarta Post. We're here to listen.

Enter at least 30 characters
0 / 30

Thank You

Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We appreciate your feedback.