T

he New Indonesia Party (PIB), the majority party on the Singkawang Legislative Council, may not be able to maintain its existence on the council should the much-debated bill on legislative elections be enacted in its current state.

Singkawang regency, which is dominated by Chinese-Indonesians, saw four of its 25 legislative council seats filled by members of the PIB, a party known for its policies that accommodate the interests of the Chinese descents.

Although the party only gained 0.19 percent of votes nationwide in the 2009 polls, putting it in 34th position on the list of the total 38 political parties in the country, the PIB managed to win the majority of 11.91 percent of regional legislative votes in Singkawang.

But that would mean nothing if the House of Representatives decided to approve the election bill that critics say would jeopardize democracy in the regions.

The bill, which is to replace the 2008 Legislative Elections Law, for instance, would increase the legislative threshold — the minimum percentage of the vote needed to enter the House — from 2.5 percent to at least 4 percent.

The problem is, critics say, that the threshold would likely apply nationwide, including to political parties that aim for seats on regional councils.

While the lawmakers are still debating whether they should raise the threshold, the government has approved the House’ proposal that the agreed legislative threshold will also apply for provincial and regional councils.

That means a party gaining a percentage of votes nationally less than the threshold, would lose the chance to send representatives to local councils.

If the 4 percent threshold had been in place in 2009, the PIB would not have dominated the Singkawang council. Its four seats would have been won by House parties.

The move has sparked fears among minor parties.

“This bill has been ridden by a motive to destroy democracy in the country. The bigger parties’ desire to establish a majority tyranny is obviously unconstitutional. But what can we do today as we don’t have House seats?” said Didi Supriyanto, the secretary-general of the Democratic Reform Party (PDP).

Election observers are also wary of the planned revisions to the 2008 law. Hadar Nafiz Gumay of the Center for Electoral Reform criticized the bill for disregarding the fact that “Indonesia is a plural nation where several regions have unique characteristics, socially and culturally”.

“This will also affect the political situation at local levels
which will not necessarily depict the same constellation at the national level. This is the beauty of Indonesia.”

Hadar cited as an example Deiyai Regency in Papua, where 13 of the 20 members on its legislative council are politicians from non-parliament parties such as the Pioneer Party, the National Front Party (Barnas) and the Regional Unity Party (PPD).

“If the 13 councilors were scrapped, then the domination of Deiyai people’s political aspirations would have been literally sacrificed to please the interests of Jakarta’s bigger political parties.”

Twenty-nine of the 38 political parties competing in the 2009 elections failed to pass the legislative threshold set at 2.5 percent. Even though they do not have seats in at the House in Jakarta, dozens managed to win councilor seats at the local level.

The Crescent Star Party (PBB), which gained 1.79 percent in votes, for example, has 417 of their members sitting on provincial, regental and city councils.

The Christian-based Prosperous Peace Party (PDS) also won numerous councillor seats in many regions with significant Christian populations, such as Papua and North Sulawesi.

But some lawmakers argued that the demise of minor parties was not necessarily a bad thing for democracy. Arif Wibowo, a lawmaker from the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), who heads the special committee overseeing the bill, said changing the threshold rulings was aimed at establishing a simple multi-party system.

“The system will be politically and economically more efficient,” he said, refutting the notion that the idea was undemocratic and aimed at forcefully kicking out smaller parties.

Arif said that he believed that an effective democracy should not have more than 10 political parties competing in an election.

Some politicians argued that a large number of parties in elections and the House had not only made elections more difficult to manage but had often led to political instability.

But Hadar did not buy the argument, saying that he would file a judicial review to the Constitutional Court to challenge the bill should the House enact it with the new legislative threshold ruling.