The Quality of Indonesian Democracy Today - Essay Example

The Quality of Indonesian Democracy Today Introduction It cannot be argued that democracy, as witnessed today in Indonesia came immediately after the fall of President Suharto. Not even after the reign of Megawati Sukarnoputri and Abdurrahman Wah. The freedom of opinion and speech that is currently enjoyed by columnist has been nurtured over time. Dr. Mochtar Pabottingi, political analyst from Research Center for Political Studies in the Indonesian Institute of Sciences argues that democracy is not born but raised over time just like it is done to wine after it has been manufactured (Anderson 2000). Referring to Indonesian democracy, what Pabottingi is postulating is that the quality of Indonesian democracy today owes everything to the past. This is the point of departure in this task; to assess whether the quality of democracy in Indonesia today traces back to her history. This paper begins on the premise that Indonesia has indeed struggled with democracy for decades. Specifically, it has gone through number stages of democracy development all of which account for the quality of the democracy currently exhibited. The first struggle that began the path to the realisation of democracy was the attempted parliamentary democracy that lasted between 1949 and 1957.1 These efforts have been seen as a motivator towards the establishment of transition from parliamentary democracy to what was known as guided democracy (history has documented this period to be between 1957 and1959) (Barro 1999). Scholars have argued that the maturity of parliamentary democracy brought about project of capitalism especially during the reign of Suharto where there was stability in terms of free-market competition---something that has transcended to the democracy currently enjoyed. In addition to this, the creation of Zaken (Functional Cabinet) by President Sukarno cannot be said to be a democracy that was generated during his tenure, instead, it is a transition from parliamentary democracy to the guided democracy. Secondly, Indonesians enjoying the quality of current democracy must be made to understand slogans such as ‘liberal democracy’, ‘fifty percent plus one democracy’ or constitutional democracy.2 To accentuate on constitutional democracy for instance, political community in Indonesia argue that previous presidents such as Sukarno guided the country from a volatile positions to a more mature state where democracy is for the people rather than Western democrats (Crouch 2002; Fish 1998). Additionally, Herbert Feith argues Indonesians should not be misguided by the freedom currently enjoyed adding that it has taken time to nurture democracy from where civilians were not allowed to play a critical role, parties not of being of great importance and contenders for power showing no respect for rules of the game (Herbert 1962). It has to be noted from this point that to guide democracy to a point where it looks quality took more than just efforts. For instance, there was struggle for power between Indonesian Communist Party and the army. It also went to an extent where there was killing of six army generals as well as one lieutenant by left wing factionists in the army just to nurture the democracy as it is currently enjoyed (Crouch 2002). There is yet another area of democratic development that modern practices owe. This is the legal freedom that has necessitated Indonesians to formulate and champion for political alternatives with concomitant freedoms and rights to free speech and association. Political analysts have argued that before Indonesia arrived at the current state of democracy, there was a period where people with periodic validation of their claim to rule were never given chance. However, history has it that a number of anti-Orde Baru groups came up with a reform movement as a political rival to the new order regime that brought the existence of the modern mature democracy in Indonesia.3 In fact, the killing of 12th May 1998 shooting of four Trisakti University students is part of that history that has brought the democracy enjoyed. When Indonesians can currently air their opinion freely it must be noted that it was the fight for democratic constitution and fight for reform of justice (which included fight to keep Indonesian Armed Forces (Tentara Nasional Indonesia)) out of politics. To conceptualise this point, it is because of such past events and restrained fights for democracy that the country witnessed the first genuinely democratic elections since 1955 (the election was held in 1999 and Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDIP) led by Megawati Sukarnoputr won democratically). This is not to mention restrained fights from groups such as National Front for Indonesian Workers’ Struggle (FNPBI) which has fought for the democracy that is currently enjoyed by workers. The best approach to give when assessing how past events have contributed to the mature democracy currently enjoyed in Indonesia is to look a development of democracy in post Soeharto Indonesia. First, Indonesians struggled to end the Guided Democracy “Demokrasi Terpimpin” in late 1950s which instead of safeguarding the interest of the people, shifted political orientation to dictatorship and authoritarian. As a matter of fact, the event of free or rather democratic election witnessed in 1999 was as a result of ending the period of ideological despotism---this was actually ended when The Indonesian Communist Party was eliminated as a result of the 30th September 1965 tragedy (Anderson 2000). As a Javanese Muslim, Soeharto believed that democratical Islam was a threat to his reign thus seeing Islam as the second political enemy after Communism. This made it hard for Muslims to democratically air their views and opinions. However, a wave for liberty began when ‘regimist’ Muslim politicians, more so those from ‘militant-scripturalist’ (Komite Indonesia untuk Solidaritas Dunia Islam (KISDI), The Indonesian Committee for Muslims Word Solidarity) staged violence to demand for democracy in how state affairs are managed. Conclusion Concluding statements often mentioned by Indonesian political analyst is the uncertainty portrayed by their democratic developments. Regardless of this opinion, it is apparent that Indonesia has steadily grown democratically since the reign of Soeharto or rather, after 1945. The democracy that is currently enjoyed in the country has been found to be continuous process; not even something that can be attributed during the regime of Megawati and how Vice-President Hamzah Haz. Bibliography Anderson, Benedict (2000) ‘Old State, New Society: Indonesia’s New Order in Comparative Historical Perspective’, Journal of Asian Studies 42: 477-496. Barro, Robert J. (1999) ‘Determinants of democracy’, Journal of Political Economy 107:6, 158 183. Crouch, Harold (2002) ‘The key determinants of Indonesia’s Political Future’, text of lecture delivered at ISEAS Forum on Regional Strategic and Political Developments, Singapore, 25 July 2002. Fish, M. Steven (1998) ‘Mongolia: Democracy Without Prerequisites’, Journal of Democracy 9:3 (July 1998), 127-141. Herbert Feith, (1962).The Decline of Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia (Ithaca and London: Cornell University Press. Read More