A

gainst the majority belief that a higher electoral threshold will streamline the number of political parties represented in the legislative assembly — the House of Representatives — an election watchdog has instead proposed a much lower threshold for future general elections.

Ahead of the 2019 general elections, a watchdog has suggested the electoral threshold be reduced to 1 percent from 3.5 percent. It is of the opinion that a lower threshold will ensure greater democracy as it will accommodate small political parties.

National coordinator of the People’s Voter Education Network (JPPR) Masykurudin Hafidz said increasing the threshold percentage would be counterproductive to the value of democracy, in a sense that an election had to provide space for society’s minority elements besides the majority.

Under the current system, parties with a total vote count that does not pass the minimum threshold cannot be considered for the national legislature. As a result, voters who cast their votes for small parties would not be considered in the process.

“As an example, the votes cast by voters living in eastern Indonesia, who usually have to travel for days to reach polling stations (TPS) just to cast their votes, will waste their time [if they vote for small parties] and would not be accounted for because of the threshold,” he said.

He further said that the idea of big political parties wanting to increase the threshold appeared to be just an attempt by them to marginalize small parties.

“Instead of blocking the path of small parties, political elites from big parties should reflect on themselves and ensure that their party’s platform really embraces the people’s interests,” Masykurudin said.

Earlier, several party elites announced their desire to increase the threshold, in a bid to raise competitiveness among parties and simplify the multi-party and party faction system at the House to make the decision-making process more efficient. Nasdem Party chairman Surya Paloh, for example, has announced on the party’s official website that the threshold percentage should be raised to 7 percent.

A researcher at the Association for Elections and Democracy (Perludem), Heroik Pratama, argued that current intense deliberations and prolonged decision making in the House was because of the lack of influential party factions, adding that fewer political parties did not necessarily mean a more efficient legislature.

Besides, Pratama further went on, the current electoral districts had failed to ensure candidates adequate time for campaigning to familiarize themselves and their programs to their constituencies because the areas they had to cover were too vast.

“We suggest that the number of electoral districts be expanded from 77 to 121. It will also encourage politicians to understand better their constituencies before representing them in parliament,” he said.

He also said reducing the number of contested seats to only between three and six in each district would provide more competitiveness among parties and their proposed candidates. Under the current system, contested seats in each electoral district could number between three and 10.

Deputy Chairman of Perludem Khoirunnisa Nur Agustyati said increasing the electoral threshold was not a relevant mechanism to deciding party representation in the House. She cited that during the 2014 general election, 10 parties had earned national legislative seats, a slight increase from nine parties in the elections of 2009, although the threshold was increased to 3.5 percent from 2.5 percent.

Earlier, political analysts have argued that a country ideally should have between three and five political parties with two big ones to help make a government strong and effective, as is the case of the US, UK and Australia. An effective government comes from a strong election-winning party in the House, and not from a ruling coalition, the analysts said. (fac)