Mixed reviews, ranging from interesting to boring, were voiced from political experts and political observers following the final televised debate among presidential candidates, however most agreed it was a better show.
Aleksius Jemadu, the acting dean of social and political sciences at Pelita Harapan University, said he appreciated Megawati's honest acknowledgement of political parties' small contribution to political education. Although her responses to questions were generally boring, Aleksius said.
With people waiting for policy breakthroughs, Megawati could have offered to solve so many problems we are facing in the evolution of our democracy, he said.
In the presentation of her vision and mission, however, Megawati spent most of her time giving an unnecessary description of problems that were already obvious, Aleksius said.
On top of that, many of her statements were normative, he said.
"One important thing that we need to appreciate in Megawati's presentation was her honest acknowledgement that political parties including her own, had not politically educated their followers which meant democratization had produced negative side effects. The score for Megawati is 3," Aleksius said.
Meanwhile, Yudhoyono did give a systematic presentation of the current state of affairs in relation to the three topics - the unitary state of the Republic of Indonesia, democracy and regional autonomy - but unfortunately he did not elaborate on integration or relationships between the three issues.
"*Yudhoyono's* strong point was that he was knowledgeable about the problems that Indonesia is facing today, and he offered concrete steps ahead to solve those problems. The score for SBY is 4," Aleksius said.
Like Yudhoyono, Jusuf Kalla succeeded in convincing the public he had the capacity to make things better in the five years to come, with his knowledge of details of the negative side effects of democracy and regional autonomy.
"Kalla made a good point when he criticized SBY's TV ads, which endorsed the imperative of a single-round election," Aleksius said, adding that he had also given Kalla a score of 4.
Usman Hamid, coordinator of the Commission for Missing Persons and Victims of Violence (Kontras), said Megawati was the weakest among the candidates in the three-round debate series.
"She was lacking in concrete concepts, dynamics and depth. She kept repeating, over and over again, about Pancasila, the 1945 Constitution and declaration of independence.
"*Megawati* showed no improvement at all from the first to the last debate," Usman said.
"She was like a robot out there. Therefore, I give her a score of 3," he added.
According to Usman, Yudhoyono stole the show, but only with a very slight margin over Kalla.
"Kalla took most of the offensive initiative during the debate. SBY then managed to answer Kalla's attacks with clear elaboration. He also delivered some interesting concepts such as the one on local elections. I give SBY 5 plus, and Kalla 4," Usman said.
Ignatius Haryanto, executive director of the Institute for Press and Development Studies, shared a similar view to Usman, claiming Yudhoyono had won.
"In general, the debate was very interesting as participants went all out. However, Megawati remained very unclear with her policies," Ignatius said.
However, there were still some issues that the three candidates could have used as a debate material, he said.
"For example, the issue regarding discriminatory regional regulations. SBY said his governance had cancelled around 3,000 regulations out of 12,000," Ignatius said.
"However, the other candidates failed to recognize that such a fact shows SBY's administration had only cancelled a quarter of the discriminatory bylaws."
J. Kristiadi, a political analyst for the Centre for Strategic International Studies (CSIS), said Kalla's performance and appearance was spectacular.
"JK was crazy! He looked like David attacking Goliath," Kristiadi said referring to Kalla's criticism of the Yudhoyono's "single-round" election ads.
"It surprised me to see JK being that brave and criticizing SBY," he said.
Kristiadi said he was satisfied. "Tonight's debate was the best *of the three*. The questions were good, and were delivered by the moderator very well."
"All three candidates showed improvements compared to the previous debate," he said.
Kristiadi also said Megawati had improved. In the two previous debates, Kristiadi had rated Yudhoyono "Good" and "Very Good". Kalla had got "Satisfactory Plus" and "Excellent".
Jaleswari Pramowardhani, a political analyst from the Indonesian Institute of Sciences (LIPI), said the last debate was quite interesting although the three candidates had not answered all questions satisfactorily.
Yudhoyono was clear on general issues but weak in detailed cases, Jaleswari said.
Megawati stole the audience's attention on the family planning program, she said.
Kalla stood out with his attack on Yudhoyono, which won the audience's applause, but his explanation about macro issues was lame, Jaleswari said.
"I highlighted Megawati who displayed her best performance tonight," she said. Jaleswari refused to reveal her scores for the three candidates' performances.
| 
|
|
|
|
|
|
|