Constitutionalism in Asia in the Early Twenty-First Century

(Greg DeLong) #1

national DPR and 4 per cent in the local DPRDs, with seats in at least half


the provinces and districts throughout Indonesia.


In the 1999 elections, only six political parties qualified to contest in 2004 on the


basis of the 1999 result. The solution, adopted by several parties, was to merge and


change their name enough to satisfy the national election commission, but not to


confuse the voters. For instance, Partai Keadilan (PK) changed its name to Partai


Keadilan Sejahtera (PKS); and the Crescent and Star Party (Partai Bulan Bintang –


PBB) of 1999 became the Star and Crescent Party (Partai Bintang Bulan – PBB) of


2004 – both contested the 2004 election as ‘new’ parties.


One of the main objectives of the various thresholds was to limit the number of


parties in the arena of electoral competition. In the 2009 elections, however, thirty-


eight parties contested. The number of eligible parties increased, but the number


of parties that can sit in the parliament was reduced due to Law No 10 of 2008 that


stipulates that a political party must win more than 2. 5 per cent of the total votes in


order to receive seats in the House – eleven small parties challenged this regulation


in the Constitutional Court but they failed. The results show that only nine parties


are able to have seats in the parliament. After long debate, the parliament agreed to


increase the legislative threshold from 2. 5 per cent to 3. 5 per cent while maintain-


ing an open electoral system and the method of using all votes in electoral areas


(Law No 8 of 2012 ).


As can be seen, there are three different levels: first, anyone can form a political


party; but, second, in order to contest an election such party must meet the


eligibility criteria; and third, if such party cannot obtain the minimum number


of votes then it cannot have seats in the parliament. Based on the 2009 elections.


the downside is that more than 19 million votes, or 18 per cent of the total, were


‘wasted’ because they went to the twenty-nine parties that failed to make it to


the House.


While President Soeharto allowed three political parties to contest elections, the


Indonesian reform era has been struggling to reduce the number of political parties


gradually. This struggle is because the combination of presidential system and


multiparty system is a bad choice. A strong presidency requires a simpler political-


party system. No single political party in the reform era can obtain a majority of


seats in the parliament. President Yudhoyono’s political party only won 20. 85 per


cent, which forced him to create a large coalition and to deal with other political


interests. Yudhoyono became a minority president trapped by different political


parties’ interests and ideologies. He effectively became adealer,notaleader,ashe


needs to negotiate, compromise and calculate his policy and position. This ‘bad


combination’ also means that the country spends too much money on election


campaigns and that various political voices have become too fragmented. But


certainly Indonesia could not use President Soeharto’s dictatorial model to reduce


the number of political parties. The last three elections ( 1999 , 2004 and 2009 ) were


a long and painful process.


Constitutional developments in Indonesia 337

Free download pdf