I am not sure if the majority of Indonesians are happy with the practice of the country’s democracy.
Not meaning they don’t like democracy, or that they refuse this system of government, but more that they are becoming disenchanted with how democracy has been perceived and exercised.
Since Soeharto’s departure from office in 1998, politicians — especially those at the executive and legislative branches of the government, who are the most responsible parties in the development of Indonesia’s democracy — have been steering the course of democracy.
But they have done this more in procedural terms, rather than anything else.
Rarely are they interested in making democracy work substantively with democratic elections as instruments to produce political practitioners who are willing to seriously aggregate and articulate the people’s interests.
Furthermore, they are engaged with partisan politics in the pursuit of narrow individual and group interests.
This is one reason why in the last ten years or so, public policies were not on the side of the public.
On the other hand, the majority of politicians experienced dramatic changes with regards to their lifestyle and socio-economic strata. In short, the practice of democracy has so far only benefited few, politically and economically.
It is safe to say that our democratic practices are still experiencing a gap between procedure and substance. Our democratic endeavors have not achieved what the system of government is supposed to deliver.
Three general elections have not resulted in what many envision for a democracy, where good things bind and political stability and economic prosperity is achieved.
One important factor that has contributed to the above situation is the inability of our elite, our democratic practitioners, to be serious enough to craft our democracy.
The willingness to tolerate the emergence of a humongous number of political parties, over 200 in early 2000, has hampered their ability to manage the country democratically other than to limit themselves with procedures – how elections should be conducted.
Many political parties have ensured politics is interpreted and practiced in a Laswellian sense: Who gets what, when and how. In the parliament, both at the national and regional level, parliament members cease to function as aggregators and articulators for the people’s interests.
Instead, they represent themselves as politicians without sense of a deeper calling.
Politics has therefore become a commodity, something that can be traded for a substantial amount of money. This is particularly exercised to buy the people’s support in elections.
Under this situation, regardless of the fact that Indonesia is regarded worldwide as the third largest democratic country after India and the US, our democracy is actually heading in a direction never envisioned by theorists of this government system.
Will such an unpleasant democratic situation change in 2010. The answer is, of course, in the negative. President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has hinted he is aware of the situation. That is why his three agendas include democracy development, the two others being economy and law enforcement.
But his 100 days into his second term does not seem to provide him with a good, decent start. The Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK), National Police and Attorney General’s Office fiasco has put the President on the defensive. This, in turn, has hampered him and his Cabinet’s ability to fully concentrate on their 2010 agenda.
The determination of the House of Representative Council (DPR) to embark on the inquiry move into the Bank Century issue, will be a major factor slowing down our attention to improve the quality of our democratic practices.
If not managed carefully, it would be detrimental to democracy. With the formation of the Special Committee, along with its leaders and members, undemocratic arrangements may already be in place.
All in all, we will not witness meaningful changes in our democracy’s quality in 2010. Unless, the government is blessed with some unseen force and dares to introduce a number of bills on parties and elections, we will not experience a decent practice of democracy we can be proud of and encounter meaningful benefits, socially, economically and politically.
Those bills should reduce the number of parties, to make sure that elections do not involve vote buying and eliminate incoherent political arrangement.
The writer is dean of the School of Social and Political Sciences, UIN Jakarta.
