Toward fair competition, an end to political dynasty
Jakarta Post | Page: 6 - Original link
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Showing posts with label election. Show all posts
Sunday, July 6, 2014
Saturday, July 5, 2014
Untuk Para Kawan Yang Belum Mantap Memilih Capres
Dear Kawan,
Pertama-tama
terimakasih telah menyempakan mampir dan membaca tulisan ini. Kalau kita belum
berkenalan langsung, nama saya Berly yang berprofesi utama sebagai akademisi dan peneliti.
Tulisan-tulisan saya di media massa tentang berbagai hal bisa di baca di blog
ini. Saya tergerak membuat tulisan ini setelah membaca tulisan senior aktivis kritis yang saya kagumi
dan pernyataan seorang guru yang amat saya hormati.
Kalau mereka berdua saja berani bersikap dan mengajak, maka keteladanan mereka perlu
diikuti.
Apabila
anda sudah mantap dengan pilihan capres-cawapres anda, saya hormati pilihan
anda. Bagus bila sama dan dan tidak apa bila beda. Syukur-syukur kita bisa kerjasama
untuk (sedikit) perbaiki Indonesia di masa mendatang, siapapun presiden
Indonesia 2014-2019. Tapi bagi kawan-kawan yang termasuk dalam 11-23 % pemilih
yang belum mantap dengan pilihan capres-cawapres-nya, mudah-mudahan tulisan ini
ada manfaatnya. Adapun lima faktor utama yang menjadi penentu pilihan saya
adalah:
1. 1.
Saya tidak puas dengan pemerintahan 2009-2014
Melambatnya pertumbuhan dan pengentasan kemiskinan, meningkatnya kesenjangan, melonjaknya defisit dan maraknya korupsi terjadi di masa 2009-2014. Banyak keputusan penting lamban diambil dan pejabat tinggi yang minim kinerja terus duduk enak di kursinya (sampai KPK menjemput).
UU
Minerba yang (tumben) progresif terus ditunda pelaksanaannya dan ketika
akhirnya dikeluarkan PP 1/2014 banyak loop hole-nya sehingga kekayaan
alam Indonesia terus dikuras dengan nilai tambah lokal yang minimal.
Prabowo
didukung oleh semua parpol penguasa dan pendukung SBY di 2009-2014 di set-gab (minus
PKB). Apakah perubahan nyata bisa terjadi dengan tim yang sama dan sekedar ganti
kapten? Mohon maaf bila saya tidak bisa se-optimis dan se-naif itu. Sudah nggak perform masa mau berkuasa terus? Jadi oposisi dulu lah 5 tahun.
2.
Saya ingin pemerintahan yang bebas korupsi dan minim bocor anggaran
Tidak
efektif itu masalah. Tapi korupsi adalah kejahatan berat dan masalah utama pembangunan di Indonesia. Coba hitung berapa Ketum atau Mantan
Ketum Parpol pendukung Prabowo yang terpidana/tersangka korupsi: Suryadharma Ali dari PPP (kedua dari kanan) dalam korupsi haji, Anas Urbaningrum (PD) dalam korupsi
Hambalang, Luthfi H. Ishak (PKS) dalam korupsi sapi. Adapun Ketum PBB, M.S. Kaban (paling kanan) sedang diusut dalam korupsi SKRT Kemenhut. Belum korupsi Quran dan penyuapan pilkada.
Kredit foto: Kompas (link)
Dan tentunya ada calon menteri utama, Ical di Golkar (anda tahu orangnya yang mana) yang tidak dapat saya bahas disini masalahnya. Perlu blog post tersendiri yang super puanjang. Sebaliknya para Ketum dan petinggi parpol pendukung Jokowi-JK tidak satupun yang menjadi pasien KPK.
Dengan digantinya Ketum PKS dan PD, akankah para petinggi di parpol pendukung akan berubah dan jadi menteri yang bersih+efektif di kabinet Presiden Prabowo? Ical juga akan hilang dari ruang publik Indonesia sebentar lagi. Mohon maaf bila saya tidak bisa se-optimis itu.
Dan tentunya ada calon menteri utama, Ical di Golkar (anda tahu orangnya yang mana) yang tidak dapat saya bahas disini masalahnya. Perlu blog post tersendiri yang super puanjang. Sebaliknya para Ketum dan petinggi parpol pendukung Jokowi-JK tidak satupun yang menjadi pasien KPK.
Dengan digantinya Ketum PKS dan PD, akankah para petinggi di parpol pendukung akan berubah dan jadi menteri yang bersih+efektif di kabinet Presiden Prabowo? Ical juga akan hilang dari ruang publik Indonesia sebentar lagi. Mohon maaf bila saya tidak bisa se-optimis itu.
Prof Emil Salim menyatakan bahwa mafia migas
yang merupakan kebocoran anggaran luar biasa hingga ratusan triyun, dekat dengan
salah satu cawapres. Sedikit google menunjukkan ke foto ini. Apakah kebocoran ini akan ditutup
bila Wapres 2014-2019 adalah orang yang membiarkan dan tidak bisa merubah kondisi selama 5
tahun sebagai Menko Ekonomi? Sekali lagi mohon maaf bila saya tidak bisa
se-optimis dan se-naif itu.
Hashim, adik Prabowo dan penasihat serta penyandang dana utamanya, menyatakan pada pertemuan resmi USINDO di Washington 17 Juli 2013 bahwa Prabowo dan dirinya pro -Amerika dan perusahaan Amerika akan menjadi priviliged partner dalam berbisnis di pada pemerintahan Presiden Prabowo (liputan dan video). Kenapa bukan berikan privilise dan prioritas pada pengusaha domestik yang butuh bantuan menembus pasar global? Kurang privilise dan prioritas apa perusahaan Amerika seperti Freeport, Caltex dan Newmont? Serius menekan kebocoran atau hanya retorika kampanye?
3.
Saya ingin Presiden yang efektif dan bisa menggerakkan birokrasi
Institusi
sipil, apalagi pemerintah, beda jauh dengan militer/bisnis dimana pimpinan bisa menghukum, geser dan pecat dengan cepat. Tidak banyak
mantan militer yang berprestasi di pemerintahan sipil karena
perlu kepemimpinan yang beda. Pada sistem demokrasi kita ada DPR, MK dan MA yang dalam konstitusi setara dengan Presiden sehingga dibutuhkan temperamen dan karakter yang unik dalam kondisi ini. Dialogis dan tenang, tapi juga strategis dan bisa bangun sistem meritokrasi serta bangun aliansi dengan berbagai elemen masyarakat. Terlalu frontal ala Gus Dur juga tidak produktif .
Pada negara demokrasi jaman modern, saya baru ketemu dua (tolong tambahkan bila tahu yang lain) petinggi militer yang menjadi presiden efektif. Dwight Eisenhower, presiden Amerika 1953-1961 yang mantan panglima Sekutu di Perang Dunia 2 dan sempat menjadi Rektor di Universitas Columbia (1948-1950). Satunya lagi adalah Presiden SBY yang sempat jadi menteri pertambangan (1999-2001) dan menko polkam (2001-2004) sebelum menjabat presiden yang efektif (menurut saya, tentu anda boleh beda) pada periode pertama-nya (2004-2009). Apa beda periode pertama SBY dengan yang kedua? Jelas pembedanya adalah duet efektif gaya yin-yang dengan JK yang banyak disebut real president.
Pada negara demokrasi jaman modern, saya baru ketemu dua (tolong tambahkan bila tahu yang lain) petinggi militer yang menjadi presiden efektif. Dwight Eisenhower, presiden Amerika 1953-1961 yang mantan panglima Sekutu di Perang Dunia 2 dan sempat menjadi Rektor di Universitas Columbia (1948-1950). Satunya lagi adalah Presiden SBY yang sempat jadi menteri pertambangan (1999-2001) dan menko polkam (2001-2004) sebelum menjabat presiden yang efektif (menurut saya, tentu anda boleh beda) pada periode pertama-nya (2004-2009). Apa beda periode pertama SBY dengan yang kedua? Jelas pembedanya adalah duet efektif gaya yin-yang dengan JK yang banyak disebut real president.
Prabowo
belum pernah memimpin institusi sipil besar selain Ormas HKTI dan Partai
Gerindra serta konglomerasi bisnis 1.67 trilliun dimana posisinya sangat dominan. Lain hal bila Prabowo pernah jadi walikota/gubernur/menteri. Apakah sebuah tim sepakbola yang berisi pemain lama minim prestasi bisa berubah jadi kompak dan banyak hasilkan gol cantik dengan hanya ganti kapten? Tidak mudah, tapi masih bisa terwujud bila kapten baru adalah pemain bola berpengalaman, inspiratif dan play-maker. Tapi bila kapten baru adalah mantan kapten tim basket yang jago tapi minim pengalaman di sepakbola??? Hmmm.... Dapatkah dalam 2-3 bulan, Prabowo belajar birokrasi super cepat, efektif menggerakkan pemerintahan dan membantah semua preseden sejarah? Mohon maaf bila sekali lagi saya tidak bisa se-optimis dan se-naif itu.
Saya lahir dan 32 tahun beraktivitas di
Jakarta (rumah kadang di tengah, lama di pinggiran luar dikit dan sekarang di
pinggiran dalam dikit hehe). Kepemimpinan Jokowi-Ahok mampu menggerakkan PNS DKI dan
perbaiki pelayanan. Jauh bedanya dibanding para Gubernur
sebelumnya. Kepemimpinan transformatif ini juga sudah di verifikasi ke para
mahasiswa saya yang bekerja di pemda DKI.
4.
Saya tidak suka kampanye hitam dan SARA
Kampanye negatif adalah penyebaran kelemahan/kesalahan faktual dengan sengaja. Kampanye hitam adalah penyebaran informasi salah/bohong dengan sengaja. Kampanye negative Maybe, Kampanye hitam No!
Empat orang capres-cawapres beragama Islam. Para capres cenderung abangan dengan para cawapres lebih kuat warna keislaman-nya. Hatta dulu aktivis masjid Salman ITB dan JK lebih kental lagi dengan kepemimpinannya di HMI, NU dan Dewan Masjid Indonesia (DMI). Tapi seorang Buya Syafii Marif yang mantan Ketua PP Muhammadiyah, sampai kaget dan ngeri ketika menjumpai masyarakat takut memilih capres nomor urut dua, Joko Widodo, karena diisukan kafir (link berita). Banyak keluarga besar saya di Sumbar yang juga terpengaruh issue yang sama.
Empat orang capres-cawapres beragama Islam. Para capres cenderung abangan dengan para cawapres lebih kuat warna keislaman-nya. Hatta dulu aktivis masjid Salman ITB dan JK lebih kental lagi dengan kepemimpinannya di HMI, NU dan Dewan Masjid Indonesia (DMI). Tapi seorang Buya Syafii Marif yang mantan Ketua PP Muhammadiyah, sampai kaget dan ngeri ketika menjumpai masyarakat takut memilih capres nomor urut dua, Joko Widodo, karena diisukan kafir (link berita). Banyak keluarga besar saya di Sumbar yang juga terpengaruh issue yang sama.
Belum
dengan issue komunis (ini dan ini) ,yang ironisnya disebar oleh Fadli Zon
yang menziarahi makam Karl Marx. Bila PDIP disebut
komunis karena ada Budiman Sudjatmiko yang mantan PRD, bagaimana dengan Partai
Gerindra yang ada Pius Lustrilanang? Dan Andi Arief yang dulu di PRD bersama Budiman, sekarang staf khusus Presiden SBY. Menepuk air di dulang, terpercik muka
sendiri.
Salam perkawanan untuk yang pernah membaca majalah Kawanku yang dituduh Kivlien Zein berbau komunis karena menggunakan istilah "kawan". :-)
Salam perkawanan untuk yang pernah membaca majalah Kawanku yang dituduh Kivlien Zein berbau komunis karena menggunakan istilah "kawan". :-)
Sumber: tokobukuandalas.com (link)
Salah satu pelanggar berat, yang termasuk lingkar istana, sudah dinyatakan tersangka. Semoga banyak yang menyusul. Untuk yang ini saya coba optimis. Semoga tidak naif.
Update 7 Juli: Ternyata saya naif. Beredar foto Jokowi sedang umrah dengan baju ihram terbalik. Seakan yang sudah haji plus beberapa kali umrah dan sedang serombongan dengan beberapa Kyai NU tidak tahu pakai ihram dengan benar. Setelah jelas fotonya dibalik dengan Photoshop maka beberapa media terpaksa revisi setengah hati (VOA-Islam hanya menambahkan foto asli, tapi tidak ganti judul dan isi berita di atas). Kamu ketahuaan!
Salah satu pelanggar berat, yang termasuk lingkar istana, sudah dinyatakan tersangka. Semoga banyak yang menyusul. Untuk yang ini saya coba optimis. Semoga tidak naif.
Update 7 Juli: Ternyata saya naif. Beredar foto Jokowi sedang umrah dengan baju ihram terbalik. Seakan yang sudah haji plus beberapa kali umrah dan sedang serombongan dengan beberapa Kyai NU tidak tahu pakai ihram dengan benar. Setelah jelas fotonya dibalik dengan Photoshop maka beberapa media terpaksa revisi setengah hati (VOA-Islam hanya menambahkan foto asli, tapi tidak ganti judul dan isi berita di atas). Kamu ketahuaan!
5.
Saya tidak ingin dipimpin Presiden yang pernah menculik warga sipil Indonesia
Poin
terakhir lebih personal. Sebagai orang yang sedikit terlibat di gerakan
mahasiswa 98, saya dekat dengan banyak pentolan mahasiswa. Waktu itu, beberapa harus
menghindar dan berpindah-pindah tempat menginap beberapa bulan demi
menghindari kejaran aparat. Baru ketika Suharto tumbang, mereka bisa menarik napas lega dan keluar dari persembunyian.
Bayangkan
bila salah satu orang yang bertanggungjawab akan hal itu, akan hadir fotonya di
setiap ruang sekolah/pemerintah dan menjadi panglima tertinggi TNI. You cannot run from him anymore. Seperti dituliskan Jakarta Post “A man who has admitted to abducting rights activists — be
it carrying out orders or of his own volition — has no place at the helm of the
world’s third-largest democracy.”
Reformasi 98 pada intinya adalah penolakan terhadap Korupsi, Kolusi dan
Nepotisme (KKN) serta sentralisme gaya Keluarga Cendana. Apabila ada orang yang
dinyatakan 100 persen didukung keluarga Cendana (link berita), sesulit apa untuk berteriak #MenolakLupa dan #NeverAgain!
Anda tidak setuju? Boleh- boleh aja. Gitu aja kok repot!
Thursday, May 22, 2014
Interviewed and Quoted by Singapore Newspaper
Biasanya saya tidak posting quote di koran.
tapi ini pertama kali di wawancara oleh The Straits Times, yang merupakan koran terbesar di Singapura, jadi boleh lah.
Indonesia's presidential elections: Nationalistic tone to candidates' plans for economy
Nationalistic tone to candidates' plans for economy
Publication Date : 22-05-2014
Indonesia's presidential candidates have both devoted a substantial portion of their manifestos to fixing Southeast Asia's largest economy, but plan to adopt a more nationalistic tone in doing so.
Economic sovereignty is a key slogan for Joko Widodo, or Jokowi, and his running mate Jusuf Kalla, as well as for Prabowo Subianto and his running mate Hatta Rajasa.
They emphasise self-sufficiency in food and energy, as well as a review of the oil and gas sector and related laws, to boost national capacity.
The July 9 presidential election will be a two-way race pitting Jakarta governor Joko against former special forces commander Prabowo.
The Jokowi-Kalla document argued that this focus on self-reliance was not aimed at isolating the country, but to improve its competitiveness by relying on available resources and developing them first.
Tjahjo Kumolo, secretary-general of Joko's Indonesian Democratic Party - Struggle (PDI-P), told reporters: "Economic self-sufficiency does not mean being anti-America or anti-foreign. "If we're lacking (something), we can import it."
Both pairings outlined their platforms, broad strategies and targets in documents filed with the Election Commission this week, as required by law, and uploaded on its website.
They both sought to ensure 12 years of compulsory and free education, up from nine at present.
They also promised to develop rural areas and boost physical infrastructure in order to raise incomes and living standards.
But there were some distinctions in emphasis.
The Jokowi-Kalla ticket, in its 41-page submission, pledged to bring about clean and effective governance, reform law enforcement agencies, improve labour productivity and competitiveness, and set a target of processing investment and business licences within 15 days - plans that if realised, would improve the business climate.
The Prabowo-Hatta ticket, over nine pages, vowed to boost per capita incomes from 35 million rupiah a year to 60 million rupiah (US$3,037 to US$5,270), with annual growth of 7 to 10 per cent, as well as continue bureaucratic reforms and existing infrastructure projects.
"Both contain many good programmes that will benefit the people," Berly Martawardaya, of the University of Indonesia's economics department, told The Straits Times.
"The weakest part is neither of them stated clearly where the money will come from. Will they increase taxes or sell shares of state-owned enterprises?" he added.
The Jokowi-Kalla manifesto also calls for limits on the sale of shares in banks to foreigners, and reciprocal access for Indonesian banks in countries that have banks in Indonesia.
Significantly, it devoted some attention to the protection of human rights, including those of migrant workers and minorities, and vowed to resolve all violations, including those related to the killings of suspected communists in 1965 and the May 1998 riots.
"The strengthening of primordial and fundamentalist values threatens the existence of living with diversity in Indonesia," it said, citing the surge in conservative religious views and violence in the name of religion.
The Prabowo-Hatta manifesto only contained a brief commitment to "protect citizens from all forms of discrimination, disturbances and threats, and to uphold human rights".
Critics of Prabowo have taken issue with his human rights record, and his coalition also includes four Islamic parties, some of whose leaders have condoned religious intolerance.
Economic sovereignty is a key slogan for Joko Widodo, or Jokowi, and his running mate Jusuf Kalla, as well as for Prabowo Subianto and his running mate Hatta Rajasa.
They emphasise self-sufficiency in food and energy, as well as a review of the oil and gas sector and related laws, to boost national capacity.
The July 9 presidential election will be a two-way race pitting Jakarta governor Joko against former special forces commander Prabowo.
The Jokowi-Kalla document argued that this focus on self-reliance was not aimed at isolating the country, but to improve its competitiveness by relying on available resources and developing them first.
Tjahjo Kumolo, secretary-general of Joko's Indonesian Democratic Party - Struggle (PDI-P), told reporters: "Economic self-sufficiency does not mean being anti-America or anti-foreign. "If we're lacking (something), we can import it."
Both pairings outlined their platforms, broad strategies and targets in documents filed with the Election Commission this week, as required by law, and uploaded on its website.
They both sought to ensure 12 years of compulsory and free education, up from nine at present.
They also promised to develop rural areas and boost physical infrastructure in order to raise incomes and living standards.
But there were some distinctions in emphasis.
The Jokowi-Kalla ticket, in its 41-page submission, pledged to bring about clean and effective governance, reform law enforcement agencies, improve labour productivity and competitiveness, and set a target of processing investment and business licences within 15 days - plans that if realised, would improve the business climate.
The Prabowo-Hatta ticket, over nine pages, vowed to boost per capita incomes from 35 million rupiah a year to 60 million rupiah (US$3,037 to US$5,270), with annual growth of 7 to 10 per cent, as well as continue bureaucratic reforms and existing infrastructure projects.
"Both contain many good programmes that will benefit the people," Berly Martawardaya, of the University of Indonesia's economics department, told The Straits Times.
"The weakest part is neither of them stated clearly where the money will come from. Will they increase taxes or sell shares of state-owned enterprises?" he added.
The Jokowi-Kalla manifesto also calls for limits on the sale of shares in banks to foreigners, and reciprocal access for Indonesian banks in countries that have banks in Indonesia.
Significantly, it devoted some attention to the protection of human rights, including those of migrant workers and minorities, and vowed to resolve all violations, including those related to the killings of suspected communists in 1965 and the May 1998 riots.
"The strengthening of primordial and fundamentalist values threatens the existence of living with diversity in Indonesia," it said, citing the surge in conservative religious views and violence in the name of religion.
The Prabowo-Hatta manifesto only contained a brief commitment to "protect citizens from all forms of discrimination, disturbances and threats, and to uphold human rights".
Critics of Prabowo have taken issue with his human rights record, and his coalition also includes four Islamic parties, some of whose leaders have condoned religious intolerance.
Monday, March 25, 2013
Wednesday, July 15, 2009
Experiencing presidential election abroad
http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2009/07/15/experiencing-presidential-election-abroad.html
Berly Martawardaya , The Hague , The Netherlands | Wed, 07/15/2009 11:55 AM | Opinion
I was walking in the artistic surrounds of the diplomatic area in Jacob Catslaaan, where numerous embassies are located, after getting off from a short tram ride to The Hague train station when a middle-aged woman and a teenager approached us. The teenager asked in fluent Dutch whether we knew the direction to the Indonesian embassy.
At first, we thought they were one of the many Indonesian descendants in the Netherlands that had already gained local citizenship and wanted to apply for visa to visit their forefather's country. To our surprise, the teenager asked for directions to the Indonesian embassy as he wanted to vote. We immediately switched to talking in the Indonesian language and walked together toward Tobias Asserlaan, the location of the Indonesian embassy.
As we arrived, there was already a crowd gathered in front of the building. Most of them were Indonesian students studying in the Netherlands.
We were ushered gently toward a line where the embassy staff checked our passports and our fingers; any stains on our little fingers would have been a sign of voting a day earlier and would have disqualified us from voting a second time.
As is the norm when Indonesians meet in the same place, there was a lot of introductions and small chat. I was introduced to some embassy staff and met some old friends and made some new friends as well. It was an event that strengthened the solidarity of Indonesians abroad.
We queued to take our number and waited less than five minutes, as there were not too many people in the room, to get our election card and vote for the next president of Indonesia. Although the quick count from survey institutes already showed that one pair of candidates were leading the pack, it didn't diminish our sense of responsibility and excitement.
The time slot for Indonesians abroad to vote was the last hour of the election. In the case of the Netherlands, it was between 7-8 p.m. as many still had to go to school or work. Not long after my little finger was dipped in blue ink, the counting started. We took pictures with our stained little fingers as a memento.
The last minute decision by the Constitutional Court certainly broadened participation. There were many people like me that were registered in their respective hometowns in Indonesia, but could not get back to vote for many reasons; and were able to vote at the nearest embassy abroad. We just needed to show our passport and if the voting card was still available in the last hour of the election then we could vote.
This process was so logical that it should have always been part of voting policy. Why bother with the voter registration in the first place. The US is firm with registration requirements and they achieved around 60 percent of voting participation. Many countries make enrollment automatic unless stated otherwise. There is also the option of voting by letter that while might diminishing secrecy, is very convenient for people with scheduled activities on voting day.
One could argue that voting with ID cards or passports only would enable fraud and multiple voting. While there could be some way to dilute the ink on the little finger for Indonesian abroad, it would have been very costly to travel to another country just to vote twice.
The requirement to vote in the last hour of voting day is a practical arrangement to prevent that. It would have been easier to vote more than once in Indonesia, but if people are assigned to the nearest voting booth of their official address and the ink is made to be thicker and harder to wash off, then most troubles are avoided.
As I had just finished attending the meeting that agreed to establish the International Association of Indonesian Scientists (I4), where the high mobility of scientists and ties with Indonesian scientists in Indonesia is critical, it was very welcoming to know that no matter where we are, Indonesians are not deprived of their right to vote.
The writer is a PhD candidate in economics at the University of Siena-Italy.
Monday, June 8, 2009
A better deal for those in public office
Berly Martawardaya , Jakarta | Mon, 06/08/2009 9:56 AM | Opinion
Finally Indonesia is seeing an open debate on businessmen and family business in politics.
During the New Order period, the public turned a blind eye to public officials and their family businesses, since business was considered an acceptable means to compensate their low official salaries. Favoritism was sometimes so blatant that in one case the IMF had to include a special clause in its letter of intent, to revoke Tommy Soeharto’s license to produce cars.
Since the beginning of the Reformasi era, such practices have adopted a lower profile, but have not been outlawed and are still socially accepted. Law No. 28/1999 on good governance only broadly forbids any action that puts family or crony interests ahead of the interests of the state or society.
Incumbent President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has stated that Indonesia needs leadership that does not mix national interests with family business, and he picked Boediono as his running mate to emphasize this point. On a separate occasion Boediono said ideally public officials should have no business activity whatsoever.
The SBY-Boediono pair is clearly attempting to tap into the public uneasiness with Jusuf Kalla’s and Aburizal Bakrie’s businesses. Both Kalla and Bakrie are members of the Golkar Party. In 2007, Aburizal Bakrie ranked as the richest man in Indonesia according to a Forbes survey, with Kalla at number 33.
Kalla demanded proof to justify comments that his family business had got special treatment, and said it would be discriminatory to forbid public officials and their families from having businesses.
Megawati joined the fray and expressed support for family business regulation, but without banning them.
This seems to be a dilemma. On the one hand it is the legal right of every citizen to be involved in legal business activity. And on the other, the elusive quest for good governance is a very important policy objective – especially in a developing and consolidating democracy like Indonesia. Money cannot buy health and happiness, but it can get a lot of things. Political campaigns can be very costly and thick bank accounts can give parties a much-needed edge to win seats.
In the past, business tycoons were satisfied supporting political candidates that shared their policy views. But the world has recently seen some very rich businessmen climbing into political offices and affecting public policy on their own.
Unsurprisingly, such media tycoons have done quite well in politics since the media plays a pivotal role in political campaigns. Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi got elected three times as prime minister in Italy, while it took a military coup to oust Thaksin Shinawatra in Thailand. They both are the richest men in their respective countries and both own major TV stations.
Ross Perot, a rich oil businessman, almost defeated Clinton and became the president of the United States. Meanwhile, multi-millionaire Michael Bloomberg, the incumbent mayor of New York and owner of a massive media enterprise, is thought to be safely on his way to being reelected for the third time. Ministers of finance in the US have often come from Wall Street’s major investment firms.
Most countries allow people to run campaigns using their own money, but after becoming public officials there needs to be a separation between personal and public interests.
While it is very hard to separate a businessman from his business past – as difficult, perhaps, as it would be to separate a famous movie star-turned-politician from their glamorous past – there is a way to ensure public interests are not compromised once they are elected into office.
Whatever share or stake in a company a public office-holder has, this should be sold and the money should be put either into a fixed deposit or into the custody of a blind trust institution whose function is to manage funds but that is legally forbidden to disclose where the money is invested.
This would avoid conflicts of interest between politicians and any policies that may arise while they are in office. After the person steps down, the control over the resource would be returned to its rightful owners.
Thailand, the Philippines and South Africa, for example, even take one step further and choose to err on the precautionary side with constitutional clauses especially for politicians, their family businesses and their wealth.
In too many cases, countries’ resources and opportunities have been squandered by families of the political elite in their forays into business. While transparency and anti-corruption have had a boost in Indonesia lately, it is too early to let our guard down and be complacent.
If a businessman decides to serve the people and hold public office, a mandatory, but temporary, divestment of his wealth should be a small price to pay for such a noble pursuit.
During the New Order period, the public turned a blind eye to public officials and their family businesses, since business was considered an acceptable means to compensate their low official salaries. Favoritism was sometimes so blatant that in one case the IMF had to include a special clause in its letter of intent, to revoke Tommy Soeharto’s license to produce cars.
Since the beginning of the Reformasi era, such practices have adopted a lower profile, but have not been outlawed and are still socially accepted. Law No. 28/1999 on good governance only broadly forbids any action that puts family or crony interests ahead of the interests of the state or society.
Incumbent President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono has stated that Indonesia needs leadership that does not mix national interests with family business, and he picked Boediono as his running mate to emphasize this point. On a separate occasion Boediono said ideally public officials should have no business activity whatsoever.
The SBY-Boediono pair is clearly attempting to tap into the public uneasiness with Jusuf Kalla’s and Aburizal Bakrie’s businesses. Both Kalla and Bakrie are members of the Golkar Party. In 2007, Aburizal Bakrie ranked as the richest man in Indonesia according to a Forbes survey, with Kalla at number 33.
Kalla demanded proof to justify comments that his family business had got special treatment, and said it would be discriminatory to forbid public officials and their families from having businesses.
Megawati joined the fray and expressed support for family business regulation, but without banning them.
This seems to be a dilemma. On the one hand it is the legal right of every citizen to be involved in legal business activity. And on the other, the elusive quest for good governance is a very important policy objective – especially in a developing and consolidating democracy like Indonesia. Money cannot buy health and happiness, but it can get a lot of things. Political campaigns can be very costly and thick bank accounts can give parties a much-needed edge to win seats.
In the past, business tycoons were satisfied supporting political candidates that shared their policy views. But the world has recently seen some very rich businessmen climbing into political offices and affecting public policy on their own.
Unsurprisingly, such media tycoons have done quite well in politics since the media plays a pivotal role in political campaigns. Italy’s Silvio Berlusconi got elected three times as prime minister in Italy, while it took a military coup to oust Thaksin Shinawatra in Thailand. They both are the richest men in their respective countries and both own major TV stations.
Ross Perot, a rich oil businessman, almost defeated Clinton and became the president of the United States. Meanwhile, multi-millionaire Michael Bloomberg, the incumbent mayor of New York and owner of a massive media enterprise, is thought to be safely on his way to being reelected for the third time. Ministers of finance in the US have often come from Wall Street’s major investment firms.
Most countries allow people to run campaigns using their own money, but after becoming public officials there needs to be a separation between personal and public interests.
While it is very hard to separate a businessman from his business past – as difficult, perhaps, as it would be to separate a famous movie star-turned-politician from their glamorous past – there is a way to ensure public interests are not compromised once they are elected into office.
Whatever share or stake in a company a public office-holder has, this should be sold and the money should be put either into a fixed deposit or into the custody of a blind trust institution whose function is to manage funds but that is legally forbidden to disclose where the money is invested.
This would avoid conflicts of interest between politicians and any policies that may arise while they are in office. After the person steps down, the control over the resource would be returned to its rightful owners.
Thailand, the Philippines and South Africa, for example, even take one step further and choose to err on the precautionary side with constitutional clauses especially for politicians, their family businesses and their wealth.
In too many cases, countries’ resources and opportunities have been squandered by families of the political elite in their forays into business. While transparency and anti-corruption have had a boost in Indonesia lately, it is too early to let our guard down and be complacent.
If a businessman decides to serve the people and hold public office, a mandatory, but temporary, divestment of his wealth should be a small price to pay for such a noble pursuit.
The writer is a lecturer at the School of Economics, University of Indonesia and a PhD candidate in economics at the University of Siena-Italy.
Wednesday, April 15, 2009
A district-based system: More efficient, accountable
Berly Martawardaya , JAKARTA | Wed, 04/15/2009 10:20 AM | Opinion
The legislative elections passed relatively peacefully, so now what?
We could all sit down and argue hypothetically about the exquisite courting dance between political parties forming coalitions for the upcoming presidential race.
But ultimately, the reality will be more heart wrenching than Dancing with the Stars or Indonesian Idol.
We should definitely investigate irregularities in registrations and election conduct, impose stiff penalties for offenders, and reschedule elections where necessary.
We need election results to be legitimate and final. Don’t let Indonesia’s political system inch any closer toward Thailand, where the legitimacy of the election system is undermined and those elected face massive street protests.
Or we could ponder the major problems in our current system, and start preparing solutions. Arguably, political parties and election candidates were not well prepared when the Constitutional Court (MK) announced its decision to make the legislative elections candidate-centered instead of party-centered.
Campaign advertising was not geared toward coherent and compelling personal stories of candidates, but remained heavy with party symbols and figures and messages.
Even when candidates learn to do it right under the prevailing system, and assuming the elected legislature and incoming government do not mess with the Constitutional Court ruling, it will still be very costly to get elected as a legislator, either at national or regional level.
Lee Kuan Yew, the longtime successful prime minister of Singapore who still holds sway in government, came out with a simple and powerful law in his memoirs. The higher the cost of being elected to public office, the less clean the government will be.
We can talk all we want about having competent and genuine candidates, but even the competent and pure of heart need money to win.
The current system is very costly and forces candidates to spend massively.
The conundrum is whether to borrow and hope to recoup after winning, or to solicit campaign
contributions from wealthy donors and remain beholden to their interests.
We need to decrease the size of electorates (dapil) so candidates can focus their campaigns more effectively and provide more bangs for their bucks.
The current system, a multiple seat constituency, needs to change to single seat constituency – a district system.
Now is a rare moment where political parties’ needs coincide with public interest. Election candidates want to reduce their campaign costs and the public wants more accountability.
In district system, a political party only fields one candidate in each district, thus escaping bloody and costly feuds where candidates from the same party fight each other for votes.
The accountability side will also be well served. With only one legislator, the electorate knows who they can hold responsible for policies in parliament and whether to punish or re-elect candidates accordingly.
What about claims that a district system would weaken parties?
Maybe this question should be reframed to “what kind of election system is best for Indonesia?” We adopted the proportional system from the Dutch.
In such a small country, it is safe to assume that regional differences do not really matter, thus whoever becomes a member of parliament within one party has little consequence.
But Indonesia is much larger than the Netherlands, with real regional differences. Our diversity should be a strength instead of being glossed-over and ignored.
Having a Jakarta native with a fancy degree masquerading as a local to get a seat in the national legislature will just not do anymore.
This approach has already done too much damage. Indonesia needs more local people with local wisdom and real knowledge of local problems in the national scene.
Having a system of party primaries could enforce party discipline. No longer could someone be assigned to be candidate in one area just because of proximity – or worse, financial contributions to the party chairman.
That person must prove their mettle in an intra-party election. Thus representing the view of local party members in the corresponding district. Whoever emerges as the winner could then run as the party candidate.
If a party thinks, through surveys or other means, that it is not competitive in one area, it could opt to not run a candidate but support another party’s candidate in that area. A political pact should be made before the election and become the foundation of a permanent alliance in governing.
Thus the people would have a better idea of what is to be expected if the party or alliances of parties go on to win the election.
Indonesia’s complex tapestry of geography, ethnicity, religions and history is likely to have room for more than two national parties.
Malaysia and India have relatively permanent coalitions of parties representing different society groups, either governing or waiting in the wing as loyal oppositions.
There are also some studies that point out that having a combination of direct presidential elections and district legislative elections is the most stable system because party discipline in weaker and possible to form temporary issue and geographical alliances.
A district system would reduce campaign costs, increase accountability and produce a more stable government. What are we waiting for?
We could all sit down and argue hypothetically about the exquisite courting dance between political parties forming coalitions for the upcoming presidential race.
But ultimately, the reality will be more heart wrenching than Dancing with the Stars or Indonesian Idol.
We should definitely investigate irregularities in registrations and election conduct, impose stiff penalties for offenders, and reschedule elections where necessary.
We need election results to be legitimate and final. Don’t let Indonesia’s political system inch any closer toward Thailand, where the legitimacy of the election system is undermined and those elected face massive street protests.
Or we could ponder the major problems in our current system, and start preparing solutions. Arguably, political parties and election candidates were not well prepared when the Constitutional Court (MK) announced its decision to make the legislative elections candidate-centered instead of party-centered.
Campaign advertising was not geared toward coherent and compelling personal stories of candidates, but remained heavy with party symbols and figures and messages.
Even when candidates learn to do it right under the prevailing system, and assuming the elected legislature and incoming government do not mess with the Constitutional Court ruling, it will still be very costly to get elected as a legislator, either at national or regional level.
Lee Kuan Yew, the longtime successful prime minister of Singapore who still holds sway in government, came out with a simple and powerful law in his memoirs. The higher the cost of being elected to public office, the less clean the government will be.
We can talk all we want about having competent and genuine candidates, but even the competent and pure of heart need money to win.
The current system is very costly and forces candidates to spend massively.
The conundrum is whether to borrow and hope to recoup after winning, or to solicit campaign
contributions from wealthy donors and remain beholden to their interests.
We need to decrease the size of electorates (dapil) so candidates can focus their campaigns more effectively and provide more bangs for their bucks.
The current system, a multiple seat constituency, needs to change to single seat constituency – a district system.
Now is a rare moment where political parties’ needs coincide with public interest. Election candidates want to reduce their campaign costs and the public wants more accountability.
In district system, a political party only fields one candidate in each district, thus escaping bloody and costly feuds where candidates from the same party fight each other for votes.
The accountability side will also be well served. With only one legislator, the electorate knows who they can hold responsible for policies in parliament and whether to punish or re-elect candidates accordingly.
What about claims that a district system would weaken parties?
Maybe this question should be reframed to “what kind of election system is best for Indonesia?” We adopted the proportional system from the Dutch.
In such a small country, it is safe to assume that regional differences do not really matter, thus whoever becomes a member of parliament within one party has little consequence.
But Indonesia is much larger than the Netherlands, with real regional differences. Our diversity should be a strength instead of being glossed-over and ignored.
Having a Jakarta native with a fancy degree masquerading as a local to get a seat in the national legislature will just not do anymore.
This approach has already done too much damage. Indonesia needs more local people with local wisdom and real knowledge of local problems in the national scene.
Having a system of party primaries could enforce party discipline. No longer could someone be assigned to be candidate in one area just because of proximity – or worse, financial contributions to the party chairman.
That person must prove their mettle in an intra-party election. Thus representing the view of local party members in the corresponding district. Whoever emerges as the winner could then run as the party candidate.
If a party thinks, through surveys or other means, that it is not competitive in one area, it could opt to not run a candidate but support another party’s candidate in that area. A political pact should be made before the election and become the foundation of a permanent alliance in governing.
Thus the people would have a better idea of what is to be expected if the party or alliances of parties go on to win the election.
Indonesia’s complex tapestry of geography, ethnicity, religions and history is likely to have room for more than two national parties.
Malaysia and India have relatively permanent coalitions of parties representing different society groups, either governing or waiting in the wing as loyal oppositions.
There are also some studies that point out that having a combination of direct presidential elections and district legislative elections is the most stable system because party discipline in weaker and possible to form temporary issue and geographical alliances.
A district system would reduce campaign costs, increase accountability and produce a more stable government. What are we waiting for?
The writer is a lecturer at School of Economics, University of Indonesia
Saturday, March 14, 2009
Lanjutkan dengan SBY-Ani?
No 18 tahun XV. 12-18 Maret 2009
Rubrik Perspektif (hal 106 - original link)
Berly Martawardaya
Mari kita dukung terus. Lanjutkan!
Begitulah seruan Partai Demokrat di berbagai media massa dalam beberapa bulan ini. Iklan politik itu berupaya menyampaikan pencapaian pemerintahan Presiden SBY dan mengajak rakyat untuk melanjutkan pemerintahan di periode 2009-2014.
Pertanyaannya, SBY akan melanjutkan dengan siapa? SBY dan JK banyak mengeluarkan sinyal dan isyarat bahwa duet ini akan dipertahankan untuk periode kedua. Tapi belakangan JK mendapat banyak tekanan dari internal Golkar supaya partainya memajukan calon presiden (capres) jika memenangkan pemilu legislatif. Bagai buah simalakama, kekalahan pun sulit di bendung jika maju sendirian sebagai capres. Namun jika tidak maju akan memicu perpecahan internal di Golkar.
Di lain pihak, popularitas SBY cukup tinggi. Penurunan harga minyak dunia memungkinan pemotongan harga BBM domestik yang disambut baik. Dampak krisis ekonomi global ke Indonesia relatif lebih kecil dari negara tetangga. Redamnya isu separatisme di Aceh dan Papua juga menjadi nilai plus. Seperti layaknya pemilu dengan incumbent sebagai salah satu kandidat, pemilu berikut adalah referendum atas pemerintah yang sedang berjalan.
Jika Partai Demokrat dan koalisinya mendapat suara mendekati 20 %, terbuka kemungkinan mengusung Ani, panggilan akrab Menteri Keuangan Sri Mulyani, sebagai calon wakil presiden (cawapres). Pooling di website harian Bisnis Indonesia menunjukkan pasangan ini lebih didukung dari SBY-JK. Pada periode lima tahun mendatang ekonomi dan resesi global tetap akan menjadi permasalahan besar sehingga duet wapres-cawapres perlu memiliki kompetensi ekonomi.
Bukan pertama kali ekonom menjadi pimpinan politik. Jan Peter Balkenende, Perdana Menteri Belanda sejak tahun 2002, adalah profesor ekonomi di Free University Amsterdam sebelum terjun ke politik. Reformasi pasar tenaga kerja dan pensiun yang dilakukannya telah di puji para ekonom karena beresiko politik dalam jangka pendek tapi memiliki pengaruh positif pada jangka panjang. Balkenende pun sempat mengasah insting politiknya sebagai anggota parlemen beberapa periode sebelum menjadi pimpinan pemerintahan.
Namun Ani perlu mengkaji pilihan yang terbuka dan berhati-hati untuk tidak jatuh pada jebakan "Peter Principle", Formulasi yang dinyatakan oleh Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull, bahwa seseorang akan dinaikkan posisi dan tanggung jawab sampai satu tingkat di luar batas kompetensinya.
Para pendukung SBY, baik di Partai Demokrat atau organ informal seperti Jaringan Nusantara, telah membuka pintu untuk SBY-Ani sebagai pasangan capres-cawapres. Bahkan PKS juga telah memberi sinyal positif. Latar belakang keluarga Ani yang aktivis PNI diharapkan menjadi daya tarik bagi pemilih nasionalis dan perempuan yang sedang di kejar oleh PDI Perjuangan.
Pencapaian Ani dalam mengemudikan ekonomi Indonesia, sebagai Ketua Bappenas, Menteri Keuangan dan Menteri Koordinator Perekonomian di Kabinet Indonesia Bersatu cukup nyata. Pengakuan sebagai Menteri Keuangan terbaik dunia tahun 2006 datang dari Euromoney, majalah keuangan terkemuka di Eropa. Majalah Forbes menempatkan Ani pada peringkat ke-23 wanita paling berpengaruh di dunia.
Ani juga menunjukkan kepemimpinan dan integritas dalam berbagai kesempatan. Pembersihan di institusi Bea Cukai dan reformasi pajak menyelamatkan kekayaan negara dan meningkatkan competitivenes. Konfrontasi suspensi saham Bumi dengan Menko Kesra Aburizal Bakrie yang memiliki dukungan politik kuat menunjukkan jabatan bukan segalanya bagi Ani.
Namun bila sebelumnya Sri Mulyani dapat fokus pada perbaikan ekonomi dan permasalahan teknis, sebagai cawapres ia harus berhadapan dengan strategi politik yang abstrak dan komunikasi publik dengan audiens yang beragam latar belakang pendidikannya. Hal ini menjadi tantangan tersendiri bagi Ani untuk keluar dari comfort zone. Wapres pertama Indonesia, Mohammad Hatta, selain sebagai ekonom juga memiliki basis politik dan regional serta keterlibatan panjang dalam perjuangan menuju kemerdekaan. Herbert Feith dalam karya besarnya, The Decline of Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia, membagi peran dwitunggal Sukarno-Hatta sebagai administrator dan solidarity maker.
Bagi SBY, apakah nilai positif memiliki wapres yang loyal dalam pemerintahan sebanding dengan hilangnya dukungan mesin politik ketika berkampanye dan stabilitas ketika memerintah? Golkar tidak akan keluar dari tiga besar pemenang pemilu legislatif dan akan sulit menggolkan kebijakan pemerintah tanpa dukungannya.
Dilemma ini dapat diatasi jika Partai Demokrat mampu membangun koalisi luas dengan berbagai parpol minus Golkar dan PDI Perjuangan yang “rela” Ani menjadi cawapres.
Tapi ada kemungkinan lain dari pemunculan pasangan SBY-Ani. Yaitu demi meningkatkan posisi tawar Partai Demokrat dan menekan konsesi dari Golkar jika SBY-JK dilanjutkan. Politics is the art of possibilies. Lanjutkan!
Pertanyaannya, SBY akan melanjutkan dengan siapa? SBY dan JK banyak mengeluarkan sinyal dan isyarat bahwa duet ini akan dipertahankan untuk periode kedua. Tapi belakangan JK mendapat banyak tekanan dari internal Golkar supaya partainya memajukan calon presiden (capres) jika memenangkan pemilu legislatif. Bagai buah simalakama, kekalahan pun sulit di bendung jika maju sendirian sebagai capres. Namun jika tidak maju akan memicu perpecahan internal di Golkar.
Di lain pihak, popularitas SBY cukup tinggi. Penurunan harga minyak dunia memungkinan pemotongan harga BBM domestik yang disambut baik. Dampak krisis ekonomi global ke Indonesia relatif lebih kecil dari negara tetangga. Redamnya isu separatisme di Aceh dan Papua juga menjadi nilai plus. Seperti layaknya pemilu dengan incumbent sebagai salah satu kandidat, pemilu berikut adalah referendum atas pemerintah yang sedang berjalan.
Jika Partai Demokrat dan koalisinya mendapat suara mendekati 20 %, terbuka kemungkinan mengusung Ani, panggilan akrab Menteri Keuangan Sri Mulyani, sebagai calon wakil presiden (cawapres). Pooling di website harian Bisnis Indonesia menunjukkan pasangan ini lebih didukung dari SBY-JK. Pada periode lima tahun mendatang ekonomi dan resesi global tetap akan menjadi permasalahan besar sehingga duet wapres-cawapres perlu memiliki kompetensi ekonomi.
Bukan pertama kali ekonom menjadi pimpinan politik. Jan Peter Balkenende, Perdana Menteri Belanda sejak tahun 2002, adalah profesor ekonomi di Free University Amsterdam sebelum terjun ke politik. Reformasi pasar tenaga kerja dan pensiun yang dilakukannya telah di puji para ekonom karena beresiko politik dalam jangka pendek tapi memiliki pengaruh positif pada jangka panjang. Balkenende pun sempat mengasah insting politiknya sebagai anggota parlemen beberapa periode sebelum menjadi pimpinan pemerintahan.
Namun Ani perlu mengkaji pilihan yang terbuka dan berhati-hati untuk tidak jatuh pada jebakan "Peter Principle", Formulasi yang dinyatakan oleh Dr. Laurence J. Peter and Raymond Hull, bahwa seseorang akan dinaikkan posisi dan tanggung jawab sampai satu tingkat di luar batas kompetensinya.
Para pendukung SBY, baik di Partai Demokrat atau organ informal seperti Jaringan Nusantara, telah membuka pintu untuk SBY-Ani sebagai pasangan capres-cawapres. Bahkan PKS juga telah memberi sinyal positif. Latar belakang keluarga Ani yang aktivis PNI diharapkan menjadi daya tarik bagi pemilih nasionalis dan perempuan yang sedang di kejar oleh PDI Perjuangan.
Pencapaian Ani dalam mengemudikan ekonomi Indonesia, sebagai Ketua Bappenas, Menteri Keuangan dan Menteri Koordinator Perekonomian di Kabinet Indonesia Bersatu cukup nyata. Pengakuan sebagai Menteri Keuangan terbaik dunia tahun 2006 datang dari Euromoney, majalah keuangan terkemuka di Eropa. Majalah Forbes menempatkan Ani pada peringkat ke-23 wanita paling berpengaruh di dunia.
Ani juga menunjukkan kepemimpinan dan integritas dalam berbagai kesempatan. Pembersihan di institusi Bea Cukai dan reformasi pajak menyelamatkan kekayaan negara dan meningkatkan competitivenes. Konfrontasi suspensi saham Bumi dengan Menko Kesra Aburizal Bakrie yang memiliki dukungan politik kuat menunjukkan jabatan bukan segalanya bagi Ani.
Namun bila sebelumnya Sri Mulyani dapat fokus pada perbaikan ekonomi dan permasalahan teknis, sebagai cawapres ia harus berhadapan dengan strategi politik yang abstrak dan komunikasi publik dengan audiens yang beragam latar belakang pendidikannya. Hal ini menjadi tantangan tersendiri bagi Ani untuk keluar dari comfort zone. Wapres pertama Indonesia, Mohammad Hatta, selain sebagai ekonom juga memiliki basis politik dan regional serta keterlibatan panjang dalam perjuangan menuju kemerdekaan. Herbert Feith dalam karya besarnya, The Decline of Constitutional Democracy in Indonesia, membagi peran dwitunggal Sukarno-Hatta sebagai administrator dan solidarity maker.
Bagi SBY, apakah nilai positif memiliki wapres yang loyal dalam pemerintahan sebanding dengan hilangnya dukungan mesin politik ketika berkampanye dan stabilitas ketika memerintah? Golkar tidak akan keluar dari tiga besar pemenang pemilu legislatif dan akan sulit menggolkan kebijakan pemerintah tanpa dukungannya.
Dilemma ini dapat diatasi jika Partai Demokrat mampu membangun koalisi luas dengan berbagai parpol minus Golkar dan PDI Perjuangan yang “rela” Ani menjadi cawapres.
Tapi ada kemungkinan lain dari pemunculan pasangan SBY-Ani. Yaitu demi meningkatkan posisi tawar Partai Demokrat dan menekan konsesi dari Golkar jika SBY-JK dilanjutkan. Politics is the art of possibilies. Lanjutkan!
Penulis adalah Dosen FEUI dan alumnus Free University Amsterdam
Wednesday, March 11, 2009
Election candidates: Who are these people?
The Jakarta Post (original link)
Berly Martawardaya , JAKARTA | Wed, 03/11/2009 10:49 AM | Opinion
They are everywhere!
We cannot go anywhere or even take a sneak peak out of the window without seeing one of the gazillion advertisements for political candidates seeking legislative seats in the upcoming elections.
They invade our cozy afternoon walk around our neighborhood. Few trees are safe from being a hanging place for a smiling face asking for my vote. No matter where we go, the situation is similar if not worse.
Don’t get me wrong, I am serious about my civic responsibility and never miss voting in elections, even when I was studying abroad. I have every interest in exercising my rights and ensuring the next government is competent and responsive to people’s needs.
But who are these people?
I usually know the person in the background, since they are either the current or former presidents of Indonesia. Parties with no presidential association put a picture of their chairman to shadow their own candidate. Some others even put Obama, David Beckham or even their famous child. But I don’t know the candidates.
None of them state who they are, what they have done and what they will do to deserve my vote. Most only put their name, academic degree and number on the ballot with their party affiliation. As if I only need to be reminded to vote for a candidate, and not why.
During the American presidential election, it was hard not to know the candidates. Media dug deep to get the candidates’ background details. We know of McCain’s heroic deeds in Vietnam and how he refused to get special treatment from the Vietcong because his father was an admiral. We know how Obama did not use his Harvard law degree to get a high-paying job but became a community organizer instead.
This get-to-know process, albeit on a smaller scale, also worked with individual legislative candidates. That is how Obama and McCain became senators in the first place.
They sold their life stories and invited voters to get acquainted with them. We even know how they met their wives. To remain aloof and distance was a sure recipe for defeat.
After the constitutional court decision, this is the first time candidates have to fight for their own share of vote instead of relying on big names. They could be forgiven for not adapting to the rules of political marketing yet, but the voter might not forgive them if they do not learn quickly enough.
John Quelch, a professor at Harvard Business School, pointed to similarities between commercial and political marketing. Both need to focus on current and emerging customer needs, developing products and service solutions, informing interested citizens about them and making them easily accessible. These messages need to be delivered consistently over time.
Political candidates understandably need to be careful in taking positions on issues. While commercial marketing can focus on and profit from a single niche or group, candidates must win enough votes from their constituents to get seated in parliament. They cannot afford to antagonize any significant segment of potential voters.
Putting up a photograph of Obama or Beckham is not likely to offend anyone. But neither is showing concern and priority over the nation’s more pressing needs such as poverty, health or education.
They are either being too careful or simply don’t have a clue. If this situation continues, parliament will be filled with local leaders with deep social and religious roots. Which is not necessarily a bad idea.
Even the leader of each party is not doing well in the recognition department. Aside from the incumbent and former presidential candidates, none make us feel like we know them and how they have got this far. Instead they are trapped in a one-line stereotype (military, businessman, or worse…politician) that they need to expand upon.
Paul Waldman (2007) conducted a study that successful contenders construct their candidacies as a three-part narrative: Part one tells what is wrong with the country and its government, part two describes the place they want to take the country, and part three explains why they, and only they, can deliver us from the bleak present to the brighter tomorrow they promise.
Why do personal stories matter?
Because political candidates already have the stigma of being willing to say anything to get elected. By getting acquainted with their life journeys and arcs of experience, it is easier to identify with candidates and project how they will govern if elected.
Of course, many deviate from their previous life paths, but voters need to know and trust the person while not always agreeing with every position they are taking on issues.
According to AC Nielsen, the spending for political advertising was Rp 35 billion in 1999 and skyrocketed to Rp 3 trillion in 2004. Even with the global crisis and economic downturn looming, this cycle of elections is likely to break that limit.
Use the money well, introduce us to the candidates.
We cannot go anywhere or even take a sneak peak out of the window without seeing one of the gazillion advertisements for political candidates seeking legislative seats in the upcoming elections.
They invade our cozy afternoon walk around our neighborhood. Few trees are safe from being a hanging place for a smiling face asking for my vote. No matter where we go, the situation is similar if not worse.
Don’t get me wrong, I am serious about my civic responsibility and never miss voting in elections, even when I was studying abroad. I have every interest in exercising my rights and ensuring the next government is competent and responsive to people’s needs.
But who are these people?
I usually know the person in the background, since they are either the current or former presidents of Indonesia. Parties with no presidential association put a picture of their chairman to shadow their own candidate. Some others even put Obama, David Beckham or even their famous child. But I don’t know the candidates.
None of them state who they are, what they have done and what they will do to deserve my vote. Most only put their name, academic degree and number on the ballot with their party affiliation. As if I only need to be reminded to vote for a candidate, and not why.
During the American presidential election, it was hard not to know the candidates. Media dug deep to get the candidates’ background details. We know of McCain’s heroic deeds in Vietnam and how he refused to get special treatment from the Vietcong because his father was an admiral. We know how Obama did not use his Harvard law degree to get a high-paying job but became a community organizer instead.
This get-to-know process, albeit on a smaller scale, also worked with individual legislative candidates. That is how Obama and McCain became senators in the first place.
They sold their life stories and invited voters to get acquainted with them. We even know how they met their wives. To remain aloof and distance was a sure recipe for defeat.
After the constitutional court decision, this is the first time candidates have to fight for their own share of vote instead of relying on big names. They could be forgiven for not adapting to the rules of political marketing yet, but the voter might not forgive them if they do not learn quickly enough.
John Quelch, a professor at Harvard Business School, pointed to similarities between commercial and political marketing. Both need to focus on current and emerging customer needs, developing products and service solutions, informing interested citizens about them and making them easily accessible. These messages need to be delivered consistently over time.
Political candidates understandably need to be careful in taking positions on issues. While commercial marketing can focus on and profit from a single niche or group, candidates must win enough votes from their constituents to get seated in parliament. They cannot afford to antagonize any significant segment of potential voters.
Putting up a photograph of Obama or Beckham is not likely to offend anyone. But neither is showing concern and priority over the nation’s more pressing needs such as poverty, health or education.
They are either being too careful or simply don’t have a clue. If this situation continues, parliament will be filled with local leaders with deep social and religious roots. Which is not necessarily a bad idea.
Even the leader of each party is not doing well in the recognition department. Aside from the incumbent and former presidential candidates, none make us feel like we know them and how they have got this far. Instead they are trapped in a one-line stereotype (military, businessman, or worse…politician) that they need to expand upon.
Paul Waldman (2007) conducted a study that successful contenders construct their candidacies as a three-part narrative: Part one tells what is wrong with the country and its government, part two describes the place they want to take the country, and part three explains why they, and only they, can deliver us from the bleak present to the brighter tomorrow they promise.
Why do personal stories matter?
Because political candidates already have the stigma of being willing to say anything to get elected. By getting acquainted with their life journeys and arcs of experience, it is easier to identify with candidates and project how they will govern if elected.
Of course, many deviate from their previous life paths, but voters need to know and trust the person while not always agreeing with every position they are taking on issues.
According to AC Nielsen, the spending for political advertising was Rp 35 billion in 1999 and skyrocketed to Rp 3 trillion in 2004. Even with the global crisis and economic downturn looming, this cycle of elections is likely to break that limit.
Use the money well, introduce us to the candidates.
The writer is a lecturer at FEUI, a PhD candidate in Economics at the University of Siena, Italy and a member of the NU professional circle
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)