Back
About RSIS
Introduction
Building the Foundations
Welcome Message
Board of Governors
Staff Profiles
Executive Deputy Chairman’s Office
Dean’s Office
Management
Distinguished Fellows
Faculty and Research
Associate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research Analysts
Visiting Fellows
Adjunct Fellows
Administrative Staff
Honours and Awards for RSIS Staff and Students
RSIS Endowment Fund
Endowed Professorships
Career Opportunities
Getting to RSIS
Research
Research Centres
Centre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)
Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)
Centre of Excellence for National Security
Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)
International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
Research Programmes
National Security Studies Programme (NSSP)
Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)
Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
Other Research
Future Issues and Technology Cluster
Research@RSIS
Science and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
Graduate Education
Graduate Programmes Office
Exchange Partners and Programmes
How to Apply
Financial Assistance
Meet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other events
RSIS Alumni
Outreach
Global Networks
About Global Networks
RSIS Alumni
Executive Education
About Executive Education
SRP Executive Programme
Terrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
International Programmes
About International Programmes
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)
Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)
International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)
International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
Publications
RSIS Publications
Annual Reviews
Books
Bulletins and Newsletters
RSIS Commentary Series
Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
Commemorative / Event Reports
Future Issues
IDSS Papers
Interreligious Relations
Monographs
NTS Insight
Policy Reports
Working Papers
External Publications
Authored Books
Journal Articles
Edited Books
Chapters in Edited Books
Policy Reports
Working Papers
Op-Eds
Glossary of Abbreviations
Policy-relevant Articles Given RSIS Award
RSIS Publications for the Year
External Publications for the Year
Media
Cohesive Societies
Sustainable Security
Other Resource Pages
News Releases
Speeches
Video/Audio Channel
External Podcasts
Events
Contact Us
S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies Think Tank and Graduate School Ponder The Improbable Since 1966
Nanyang Technological University Nanyang Technological University
  • About RSIS
      IntroductionBuilding the FoundationsWelcome MessageBoard of GovernorsHonours and Awards for RSIS Staff and StudentsRSIS Endowment FundEndowed ProfessorshipsCareer OpportunitiesGetting to RSIS
      Staff ProfilesExecutive Deputy Chairman’s OfficeDean’s OfficeManagementDistinguished FellowsFaculty and ResearchAssociate Research Fellows, Senior Analysts and Research AnalystsVisiting FellowsAdjunct FellowsAdministrative Staff
  • Research
      Research CentresCentre for Multilateralism Studies (CMS)Centre for Non-Traditional Security Studies (NTS Centre)Centre of Excellence for National SecurityInstitute of Defence and Strategic Studies (IDSS)International Centre for Political Violence and Terrorism Research (ICPVTR)
      Research ProgrammesNational Security Studies Programme (NSSP)Social Cohesion Research Programme (SCRP)Studies in Inter-Religious Relations in Plural Societies (SRP) Programme
      Other ResearchFuture Issues and Technology ClusterResearch@RSISScience and Technology Studies Programme (STSP) (2017-2020)
  • Graduate Education
      Graduate Programmes OfficeExchange Partners and ProgrammesHow to ApplyFinancial AssistanceMeet the Admissions Team: Information Sessions and other eventsRSIS Alumni
  • Outreach
      Global NetworksAbout Global NetworksRSIS Alumni
      Executive EducationAbout Executive EducationSRP Executive ProgrammeTerrorism Analyst Training Course (TATC)
      International ProgrammesAbout International ProgrammesAsia-Pacific Programme for Senior Military Officers (APPSMO)Asia-Pacific Programme for Senior National Security Officers (APPSNO)International Conference on Cohesive Societies (ICCS)International Strategy Forum-Asia (ISF-Asia)
  • Publications
      RSIS PublicationsAnnual ReviewsBooksBulletins and NewslettersRSIS Commentary SeriesCounter Terrorist Trends and AnalysesCommemorative / Event ReportsFuture IssuesIDSS PapersInterreligious RelationsMonographsNTS InsightPolicy ReportsWorking Papers
      External PublicationsAuthored BooksJournal ArticlesEdited BooksChapters in Edited BooksPolicy ReportsWorking PapersOp-Eds
      Glossary of AbbreviationsPolicy-relevant Articles Given RSIS AwardRSIS Publications for the YearExternal Publications for the Year
  • Media
      Cohesive SocietiesSustainable SecurityOther Resource PagesNews ReleasesSpeechesVideo/Audio ChannelExternal Podcasts
  • Events
  • Contact Us
    • Connect with Us

      rsis.ntu
      rsis_ntu
      rsisntu
      rsisvideocast
      school/rsis-ntu
      rsis.sg
      rsissg
      RSIS
      RSS
      Subscribe to RSIS Publications
      Subscribe to RSIS Events

      Getting to RSIS

      Nanyang Technological University
      Block S4, Level B3,
      50 Nanyang Avenue,
      Singapore 639798

      Click here for direction to RSIS

      Get in Touch

    Connect
    Search
    • RSIS
    • Publication
    • RSIS Publications
    • CO05065 | Indonesian Regional Elections in Praxis
    • Annual Reviews
    • Books
    • Bulletins and Newsletters
    • RSIS Commentary Series
    • Counter Terrorist Trends and Analyses
    • Commemorative / Event Reports
    • Future Issues
    • IDSS Papers
    • Interreligious Relations
    • Monographs
    • NTS Insight
    • Policy Reports
    • Working Papers

    CO05065 | Indonesian Regional Elections in Praxis
    Sukardi Rinakit

    27 September 2005

    download pdf

    Commentary

    THIS year Indonesia carried out 226 elections of local headships for the provincial, municipal and regency levels. Since the middle of June till late August 2005, no less than 181 regional elections have taken place. The remaining 45 regions will carry out their elections from September to December.

    Ideally, the goal behind the implementation of regional elections is to speed up the process of democratic consolidation in the Republic. It should also accelerate the process of good governance so that the people can be directly involved in the process of policy-making via the ballot box.

    But observation of some 90 regions (4 provinces, 86 municipalities/regencies) indicates that the ongoing regional elections are no more than just arenas for the pursuit of power. Because of that, the dominant streak in the regional elections is the practice of money politics and the violations of political ethics by the candidates.

    Based on surveys in 90 regions done by the Centre for Political Studies, four tendencies can be detected in the regional elections. They are the high rate of abstentions (golongan putih or golput); incumbents winning and returning to office; conflicts; and the formation of party coalitions (political factions).

    Abstentions (Golput)

    The number of abstentions in the regional elections is quite high, averaging around 30% to 40%. Several regencies in Java like Banyumas, Pekalongan, Kebumen and Cilegon, among others, chalked up an average abstention rate of around 32.4%. Even the well-populated city of Surabaya chalked up 50.4%. Generally, this is also the same tendency outside Java.

    The large number of abstentions is caused by several factors. Many of the voters were not registered. The voters already knew the candidates’ performance and had made up their minds about them. As such, many voters would rather go to work than to vote. Besides, there was poor dissemination of information on the regional election process.

    Of the four factors, the most significant is voter registration, or non-registration. The usage of demographic data from the Population Office is the primary cause of these unregistered voters losing their right to vote. The Population Office’s demographic data were either poorly inventorised or outdated. Many of the voters in the 2004 general elections were not registered by the Population Office. In fact, the truly representative data for this year’s regional elections is from the list of voters for the second round presidential elections that was held on 20 September 2004. In short, poor data management is the primary cause of the high abstention rate.

    Incumbents and Bureaucrats

    Around 87% of total regional elections so far were won by the incumbents and local bureaucrats who were, generally, paired with businessmen. It was difficult for political newcomers, including active-service military personnel, to win in the regional elections. This is because of the combined political resources possessed by the local incumbents, bureaucrats and businessmen. They generally had enough funding to fight their rival candidates. With lavish funding, they could conduct unlimited political manoeuvres against their opponents.

    At the provincial level, for example, the elected pair of governor and deputy governor generally spent ‘campaign’ funds averaging Rp 100 billion (US$10 million). Whereas at the municipality/regency levels, the pair of elected local heads generally spent between Rp 1.8 billion – Rp 16 billion (US$180,000 – US$1.6 million).

    Apart from campaign expenses (determined by the local election commission), the funds were also used to pay the political vehicles, namely, the political parties which canvassed them and to influence voters (money politics). For the usage of political vehicles, the candidates must pay an average of 20% of their campaign funds.

    Apart from funding, other factors that helped the incumbents and local bureaucrats to win are their control over the bureaucratic network, good relations with the military and other local social networks favouring them. Besides, they also employed non–ethical political practices like “importing” voters from other regions, manipulating voter data (fictitious and phantom voters), intimidating the voters and pressuring the local election commission to use voter data from the 5 April 2004 legislative elections. With such old data, many people with voting rights were not registered. These were the young voters who did not yet have voting rights in the 2004 legislative elections.

    Conflicts

    Before the regional elections began, many parties predicted that these elections at the local level would lead to bloodshed or communal conflicts. Thus far, the prediction has not been borne out. Although conflicts did happen in 23 regions (from a total of 181 regional elections) these were neither communal in nature nor leading to bloodshed. Generally, the conflicts broke out between rival camps where one camp was accused of being in league with the local election commission. Tana Toraja, Pangkep, Kepulauan Sula, Bima and Korawa Selatan, among others, were regions where such conflicts took place.

    But it is clear that such conflicts in the regional elections were not caused by primordial factors like religion and local birthright issues. Indeed, the conflicts were more the result of duplication in the leadership boards, rejection by local government of regional election results and also manipulation of voter data by the electoral commissions.

    Coalition Parties (Political Factions)

    There is one interesting tendency in the regional elections. Political parties found that the directives or political lines of their central governing boards tended to be ignored in the regions. This is reflected in the high numbers of coalitions forged between political parties just for the sake of winning the regional elections. From 90 regions observed, as many as 46 regions were won by candidates shouldered by coalition parties. Those won without coalitions were by Golkar Party (in 23 regions), the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, PDI-P (12 regions), the Nation Awakening party, PKB (2 regions), Crescent and Star Party, PBB (2 regions), United Development Party, PPP (1 region), National Mandate Party, PAN (1 region) and Justice and Welfare Party, PKS (1 region).

    The high number of victories through coalition arrangements indicates that at the local level, politicians do not care about the centre’s political party lines. For example, while the PDI-P is the government’s opposition at the central level, it formed local coalitions with the parties in power, the Democrat Party and Golkar. Even in Maluku, the Islamic PKS and the Christian- oriented Peace and Welfare Party (PDS) formed coalitions between themselves, despite their contrasting ideologies, to win some seats in the regional elections.

    Conclusion

    Given these general tendencies in the regional elections, the pessimistic camp argued that the hope of regional elections becoming an accelerator of democratic consolidation and good governance has so far been largely unrealised. Much of the funds spent by the candidates may have only buttressed corrupt practices at the local level. Making this possible is the small salary received by the local heads compared to the campaign funds that they spent. At the same time, the elected incumbents and bureaucrats were predicted to only fortify oligarchic political practices at the local level.

    On the other hand, the optimistic camp asserted that democracy in Indonesia has been boosted by the successful implementation of the regional elections. The optimists pointed to several indicators to strengthen their argument: the high number of abstentions; defeat of active military candidates; no serious communal conflicts; the high number of mass protests against electoral commissions for not being neutral; and the strengthening of pluralism, such as seen in the case of the coalition between the PKS and PDS in Maluku. For the optimistic camp, all these indicators only point to one thing: mass political consciousness is increasingly on the rise. Democracy is emerging in Indonesia.

    About the Author

    Dr Sukardi Rinakit is executive director of the Jakarta-based Centre for Political Studies, Soegeng Sarjadi Syndicate. This commentary is specially written for the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University.

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series / Southeast Asia and ASEAN

    Commentary

    THIS year Indonesia carried out 226 elections of local headships for the provincial, municipal and regency levels. Since the middle of June till late August 2005, no less than 181 regional elections have taken place. The remaining 45 regions will carry out their elections from September to December.

    Ideally, the goal behind the implementation of regional elections is to speed up the process of democratic consolidation in the Republic. It should also accelerate the process of good governance so that the people can be directly involved in the process of policy-making via the ballot box.

    But observation of some 90 regions (4 provinces, 86 municipalities/regencies) indicates that the ongoing regional elections are no more than just arenas for the pursuit of power. Because of that, the dominant streak in the regional elections is the practice of money politics and the violations of political ethics by the candidates.

    Based on surveys in 90 regions done by the Centre for Political Studies, four tendencies can be detected in the regional elections. They are the high rate of abstentions (golongan putih or golput); incumbents winning and returning to office; conflicts; and the formation of party coalitions (political factions).

    Abstentions (Golput)

    The number of abstentions in the regional elections is quite high, averaging around 30% to 40%. Several regencies in Java like Banyumas, Pekalongan, Kebumen and Cilegon, among others, chalked up an average abstention rate of around 32.4%. Even the well-populated city of Surabaya chalked up 50.4%. Generally, this is also the same tendency outside Java.

    The large number of abstentions is caused by several factors. Many of the voters were not registered. The voters already knew the candidates’ performance and had made up their minds about them. As such, many voters would rather go to work than to vote. Besides, there was poor dissemination of information on the regional election process.

    Of the four factors, the most significant is voter registration, or non-registration. The usage of demographic data from the Population Office is the primary cause of these unregistered voters losing their right to vote. The Population Office’s demographic data were either poorly inventorised or outdated. Many of the voters in the 2004 general elections were not registered by the Population Office. In fact, the truly representative data for this year’s regional elections is from the list of voters for the second round presidential elections that was held on 20 September 2004. In short, poor data management is the primary cause of the high abstention rate.

    Incumbents and Bureaucrats

    Around 87% of total regional elections so far were won by the incumbents and local bureaucrats who were, generally, paired with businessmen. It was difficult for political newcomers, including active-service military personnel, to win in the regional elections. This is because of the combined political resources possessed by the local incumbents, bureaucrats and businessmen. They generally had enough funding to fight their rival candidates. With lavish funding, they could conduct unlimited political manoeuvres against their opponents.

    At the provincial level, for example, the elected pair of governor and deputy governor generally spent ‘campaign’ funds averaging Rp 100 billion (US$10 million). Whereas at the municipality/regency levels, the pair of elected local heads generally spent between Rp 1.8 billion – Rp 16 billion (US$180,000 – US$1.6 million).

    Apart from campaign expenses (determined by the local election commission), the funds were also used to pay the political vehicles, namely, the political parties which canvassed them and to influence voters (money politics). For the usage of political vehicles, the candidates must pay an average of 20% of their campaign funds.

    Apart from funding, other factors that helped the incumbents and local bureaucrats to win are their control over the bureaucratic network, good relations with the military and other local social networks favouring them. Besides, they also employed non–ethical political practices like “importing” voters from other regions, manipulating voter data (fictitious and phantom voters), intimidating the voters and pressuring the local election commission to use voter data from the 5 April 2004 legislative elections. With such old data, many people with voting rights were not registered. These were the young voters who did not yet have voting rights in the 2004 legislative elections.

    Conflicts

    Before the regional elections began, many parties predicted that these elections at the local level would lead to bloodshed or communal conflicts. Thus far, the prediction has not been borne out. Although conflicts did happen in 23 regions (from a total of 181 regional elections) these were neither communal in nature nor leading to bloodshed. Generally, the conflicts broke out between rival camps where one camp was accused of being in league with the local election commission. Tana Toraja, Pangkep, Kepulauan Sula, Bima and Korawa Selatan, among others, were regions where such conflicts took place.

    But it is clear that such conflicts in the regional elections were not caused by primordial factors like religion and local birthright issues. Indeed, the conflicts were more the result of duplication in the leadership boards, rejection by local government of regional election results and also manipulation of voter data by the electoral commissions.

    Coalition Parties (Political Factions)

    There is one interesting tendency in the regional elections. Political parties found that the directives or political lines of their central governing boards tended to be ignored in the regions. This is reflected in the high numbers of coalitions forged between political parties just for the sake of winning the regional elections. From 90 regions observed, as many as 46 regions were won by candidates shouldered by coalition parties. Those won without coalitions were by Golkar Party (in 23 regions), the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle, PDI-P (12 regions), the Nation Awakening party, PKB (2 regions), Crescent and Star Party, PBB (2 regions), United Development Party, PPP (1 region), National Mandate Party, PAN (1 region) and Justice and Welfare Party, PKS (1 region).

    The high number of victories through coalition arrangements indicates that at the local level, politicians do not care about the centre’s political party lines. For example, while the PDI-P is the government’s opposition at the central level, it formed local coalitions with the parties in power, the Democrat Party and Golkar. Even in Maluku, the Islamic PKS and the Christian- oriented Peace and Welfare Party (PDS) formed coalitions between themselves, despite their contrasting ideologies, to win some seats in the regional elections.

    Conclusion

    Given these general tendencies in the regional elections, the pessimistic camp argued that the hope of regional elections becoming an accelerator of democratic consolidation and good governance has so far been largely unrealised. Much of the funds spent by the candidates may have only buttressed corrupt practices at the local level. Making this possible is the small salary received by the local heads compared to the campaign funds that they spent. At the same time, the elected incumbents and bureaucrats were predicted to only fortify oligarchic political practices at the local level.

    On the other hand, the optimistic camp asserted that democracy in Indonesia has been boosted by the successful implementation of the regional elections. The optimists pointed to several indicators to strengthen their argument: the high number of abstentions; defeat of active military candidates; no serious communal conflicts; the high number of mass protests against electoral commissions for not being neutral; and the strengthening of pluralism, such as seen in the case of the coalition between the PKS and PDS in Maluku. For the optimistic camp, all these indicators only point to one thing: mass political consciousness is increasingly on the rise. Democracy is emerging in Indonesia.

    About the Author

    Dr Sukardi Rinakit is executive director of the Jakarta-based Centre for Political Studies, Soegeng Sarjadi Syndicate. This commentary is specially written for the Institute of Defence and Strategic Studies, Nanyang Technological University.

    Categories: RSIS Commentary Series

    Popular Links

    About RSISResearch ProgrammesGraduate EducationPublicationsEventsAdmissionsCareersVideo/Audio ChannelRSIS Intranet

    Connect with Us

    rsis.ntu
    rsis_ntu
    rsisntu
    rsisvideocast
    school/rsis-ntu
    rsis.sg
    rsissg
    RSIS
    RSS
    Subscribe to RSIS Publications
    Subscribe to RSIS Events

    Getting to RSIS

    Nanyang Technological University
    Block S4, Level B3,
    50 Nanyang Avenue,
    Singapore 639798

    Click here for direction to RSIS

    Get in Touch

      Copyright © S. Rajaratnam School of International Studies. All rights reserved.
      Privacy Statement / Terms of Use
      Help us improve

        Rate your experience with this website
        123456
        Not satisfiedVery satisfied
        What did you like?
        0/255 characters
        What can be improved?
        0/255 characters
        Your email
        Please enter a valid email.
        Thank you for your feedback.
        This site uses cookies to offer you a better browsing experience. By continuing, you are agreeing to the use of cookies on your device as described in our privacy policy. Learn more
        OK
        Latest Book
        more info