![Sample our Politics & International Relations journals, sign in here to start your FREE access for 14 days]({"type":"image" , "src" : "/sda/5947/TOC-Subject-Sample-2021-Politics-International-Relations.jpg"})
ABSTRACT
This article investigates how the Indonesian party system has created parties that increasingly rely on charisma for support and votes. Initially associated with divinely bestowed qualities, the concept of charisma has evolved to emphasize popularity and recognizability instead. In Indonesia, this tendency has combined with direct elections to distract parties from their ideal functions of developing platforms and programmes. Instead, parties have sought to pick and choose candidates that are popular to front their campaign. This has contributed to the formation of dysfunctional parties that are opportunistic, corrupt, and rent-seeking. As Indonesian parties continue their struggle to prove themselves by relying on the ephemeral attraction of personal charisma, the resultant incapacity to develop solid organization will continue to be a crippling trap for them.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author.
Notes on contributor
Ulla Fionna is a Fellow at ISEAS – Yusof Ishak Institute. She has studied at Airlangga University, the University of Warwick, and the University of Sydney. After receiving her PhD, she held post-doctoral positions and taught at the University of Sydney. She is the author of The Institutionalisation of Political Parties in Post-authoritarian Indonesia: From the Grass-roots Up (University of Amsterdam Press, 2013) and Watching Indonesia's Elections 2014 (ISEAS, 2015). Her main research interests are Indonesian politics, political parties, electoral politics, and democratization. Currently, she is studying Indonesian Muslims’ political aspirations.
Notes
1. Bradley (Citation1987) explains that other types of charisma are charisma as a personality characteristic and charisma as a social structure (see also Bligh and Kohles, Citation2009).
2. Indonesian election law only allows parties with sufficient votes to nominate candidates, forcing parties to form strategic coalitions to win. These coalitions were often decided by the candidates who were deemed most likely to win. Parties are also notorious for their practice of selling candidacies, often from outside their organization, creating some sort of bidding competition that benefits candidates with strong financial backing.
3. A Lembaga Survei Nasional (National Survey Institute) poll done after the arrests of some PD politicians placed the party as the most corrupt, with 51 percent of respondents choosing it, followed by Partai Golkar with 5 percent (Kompas, Survei LSN: Demokrat Dianggap Partai Terkorup, 15 October 2012). The arrests have worsened the respective parties' support. In a February 2013 poll Lembaga Survei Jakarta (Jakarta Survey Institute), a leading pollster, put PKS support at 2.6 percent in seventh place, while PD was fourth at 6.9 percent (Kompas, PKS Tuding Survei Merosot Karena Kasus Luthfi Hasan, 19 February 2013). PKS also received runner-up position for the title ‘most corrupt', behind PD, in the February 2013 poll. In a March 2013 poll by Lingkaran Survei Indonesia (Indonesian Survey Circle), PD scored 11.7 percent—still a far cry from the 20 percent results of 2009 (Kompas, LIS: Demokrat Terpuruk, Golkar Makin Kokoh, 17 March 2013).
4. Evidence taken from domineering leaders such as the former president Suharto himself, as well as Mahathir Mohammad in Malaysia, clearly demonstrate that reliance on individuals damages parties' capacity to develop independently.
5. During this period, parties were forced to merge, and adopt Pancasila as the only ideology allowed; they faced heavy interference from the government, and suffered from the preferential treatment for Golkar. Elections were heavily manipulated to ensure Golkar's victories.
6. See for example, Profil Partai Politik Peserta Pemilu 2009 (Yogyakarta: Pustaka Timur, 2008).
7. For discussion on PKS' moderation strategy, see Tomsa (Citation2012). Fionna (Citation2013) provides details of how nationalist/secular parties adopted Islamic activities to attract Muslim support. For example Partai Golkar held pengajian (Quranic study group), istighosah (communal prayer usually held in special circumstances), and buka puasa bersama (communal fast-breaking) during the fasting month of Ramadhan. Similarly, PDIP also held buka puasa bersama.
8. The poll was done by Soegeng Sarjadi School of Government (SSSG). See Survei SSSG: Elektabilitas Jokowi tembus 45% (detiknews, 12 September 2013).
9. The Indonesian Constitutional Court annulled Article 214 of Law no. 10 of 2008 on Parliamentary Elections. One effect of this is the effective abolishment of the party ranking list, in favour of letting only the number of votes determine a candidate's chance to be elected. As such, candidates have been even more aggressive in conducting their individual campaigns. While the current opposition coalition once called for the return to indirect form of electing local leaders, in early 2015 both sides of the government agreed to retain the indirect form.
10. The concept of aliran was first developed by Geertz (Citation1964), who categorized Javanese as either abangan (animistic, nationalist, heavily Javanese), santri (devout Islamic orientation), or priyayi (aristocrats).
11. Law 42 2008 on presidential and vice-presidential elections, article 9, states that the pairs of candidates must be nominated by party or parties with 20 percent votes—forcing parties with insufficient votes to form coalitions for nominations.
12. In the 1999 presidential election, although PDIP won, it still needed the support of other parties, and behind-closed-doors deals could not stop Megawati being outmanoeuvred by a group of Muslim parties that refused to countenance a female president. Instead, Gus Dur, a revered Muslim leader, became the president.
13. See Lembaga Survei Indonesia, ‘Menuju Pilpres yang Lebih Berkualitas 2014', November 2012.
14. Lapindo Brantas, a company responsible for drilling operation misconduct, resulting in the spewing of tens of thousands of cubic metres of mud every day since 2006, is headed by Bakrie. The company has tried to blame a distant earthquake and has yet to properly compensate locals whose villages have been buried by the mud.
15. Both NU and Muhammadiyah were established in the 1920s.
16. Mahfud MD is Former Constitutional Court chief justice, Rhoma Irama is a popular singer, while Jusuf Kalla is a former vice-president who is from Golkar Party; currently he is Jokowi's running mate as a vice-presidential candidate.
17. Hatta was nowhere to be seen when Prabowo appeared during the appeal against the election results at the Constitutional Court, and even made a negative remark against Rais before the election of the new chairman in March 2015, in which Hatta was defeated (see Jakarta Post, 2015). Hatta gained 286 while Zulkifli Hassan got 292 out of 584 votes.
18. Personal observation, November 2012.
19. Lembaga Survei Indonesia, November 2012.
20. While Aburizal may be better known for his business empire, Agung Laksono is also a savvy businessman, overseeing a number of large companies, including a major private television station.
21. After being outmanoeuvred by Gus Dur in 1999 despite her party winning the majority of votes, she finally rose to the presidency in 2001. Her election was quite monumental as she was the first female president and there was strong feeling against female presidents in Muslim-majority Indonesia.
22. Surya Paloh founded Nasional Demokrat as a mass organization first and then converted it into a political party. Hanura was founded by Wiranto and Gerindra by Prabowo. Partai Demokrat was not founded by SBY himself, but it was intended to be his political vehicle.