Indonesia has built its unique home-grown democracy within a span of 23 calendar years, but less than 15 to 16 normal years.
In politics, as in life, context is everything. This is something on which almost everyone agrees and yet most of us ignore. The result is at times tragic, and at others, it is comical, such as when after a drunken party we mistake a mouse for a hippo.
Something of the sort has been happening in the wake of the Feb. 14 Indonesian elections.
The New York Times article by Gordon LaForge titled “The sun is setting on Indonesia’s democratic era”, argues that Indonesian democracy is “backsliding”. The Economist is worried about our next president saying he is unlikely to strengthen the country’s democracy. Bloomberg is quick to point out that “Prabowo victory means democracy interrupted”.
Like your favorite snake dance, the list could go winding on and on.
The first problem is to determine what is the central property of a successful democracy. This is not easy. The fact is that virtually no two democracies look alike.
Take the United Kingdom with its Westminster parliament: the oldest but with no written constitution, no term limits for the prime minister, a first-past-the-post voting system, two dominant parties and hereditary seats in the House of Lords with a few selected by the ruling government. The United States: a written constitution, Bill of Rights, defined separation of powers, federal with an electoral college to ensure a voice for a given “state” and a powerful supreme court but one that is nominated by the president.
Share your experiences, suggestions, and any issues you've encountered on The Jakarta Post. We're here to listen.
Thank you for sharing your thoughts. We appreciate your feedback.