P

olitical citizenship entails the right to vote and exercise political power (Marshall, 1992). In a more general sense, John Rawls (2005) affirms that equal citizenship requires an identical position for every citizen to have rights and liberties under the principles of equal liberty and fair equality of opportunity. As citizens, then, women hold an equal right to men as electors and public officials.

In Indonesia, women'€™s political citizenship is not a new endowment. One day after the proclamation of independence on Aug. 17, 1945, the country unveiled the 1945 Constitution, which ensured political citizenship for women. Indonesia'€™s early government, under then prime minister Amir Sjarifuddin, appointed SK Trimurti the first female Cabinet member, in the role of manpower minister. In the first election in 1955, women grabbed 5.88 percent of national legislative seats.

In the 2014 legislative election, 49.92 percent of eligible voters were women. The election results saw women win 17.32 percent of the 560 legislative seats. Previously, the number of women lawmakers increased considerably from 8.8 percent in 1999 to 17.86 percent in 2009.

In the executive post, Indonesia had its first female president in 2001 when Megawati Soekarnoputri took office. At the local level, Indonesia had a woman governor and eight women regents and mayors from 2005 to 2008. We could say, therefore, that the country'€™s political structure is female-friendly.

Nonetheless, better political citizenship does not automatically accelerate better gender-related development achievements. According to Indonesia'€™s Gender-Based Human Development 2013, the country'€™s gender development index reached 68.52 in 2012. It was indeed an improvement over the last 10 years, but Indonesia'€™s gender deficit remains high.

The Human Development Report 2013 placed Indonesia 106th with 0.494 points on the Gender Inequality Index. The report indicated that Indonesian women still have to deal with the loss of development achievements in reproductive health, empowerment and labor participation. The maternal mortality rate reached 220 per 100,000 live births in 2010. The portion of the female population with at least a secondary education was only 36.2 percent (2006-2010). The female labor force accounted for only 51.2 percent in 2011.

Both presidential candidate pairs contesting the July 9 election have addressed gender-related issues. Prabowo Subianto-Hatta Rajasa have said they would provide effective protection for women and enhance the institutional status of the Women'€™s Empowerment and Child Protection Ministry. Joko '€œJokowi'€ Widodo-Jusuf Kalla have expressed their commitment to the empowerment of women in politics and development.

Both presidential contenders offer progressive platforms to address gender inequality. However, they have to realize that the implementation of gender-related policies is also part of the local government domain. My observations in gender-related development policies at the local level reveals that regional governments implement poor gender-mainstreaming policies. They perform minimal gender-specific assessments and considerations in designing local development policies (gender-blind planning).

Specific acknowledgement of distinctions between men and women in many areas of development policies, particularly in education and economic policies, is rare. The only gender-specific policy considering the practical needs of women is related to women'€™s role as a maternal group, such as reproductive health programs. Other specific policies concern women'€™s protection against domestic violence and the establishment of semi-governmental organizations to assist female victims of domestic violence.

Furthermore, the efforts to redistribute the gender imbalance in development planning are focused mainly on single-sex intervention. Local governments usually implement gender-redistributive policies through interventions to raise women'€™s awareness of gender equality and empowerment via familiarization programs and training.

This disadvantageous development setting for women is linked to decentralization regulatory regimes. Law No. 32/2004 on local government and its two implementing regulations (government regulations No. 38/2007 and No. 41/2007) deem women'€™s empowerment as devolution. Local governments, then, implement women'€™s empowerment delegated authority as a gender-redistributive authority, not as gender mainstreaming in local development planning that encourages strategic gender interests.

Moreover, the home minister regulates local budgeting by issuing Ministerial Regulation No. 13/2006 on the manual of local financial management. The regulation determines local financial account and local expenditure classification codes based on local governments'€™ functions or delegated authorities. The regulation, indeed, does not employ gender mainstreaming or gender difference perspectives in local budgeting.

Accordingly, both presidential candidates should reconsider their platforms on gender-related issues by evaluating decentralization regulatory regimes to affirm better gender-related policies and planning. The elected president, then, has to harmonize the Home Ministry and Women'€™s Empowerment and Child Protection Ministry in addressing gender-related issues.

The writer is a lecturer in politics at Brawijaya University in Malang, East Java, and is researching regional election and decentralization regimes for his PhD at the Department of Politics and Public Policy, Flinders University, in Adelaide, Australia.