Independents: An alternative to party power

Robert Endi Jaweng
Executive Director of KPPOD, Jakarta

The strict requirements of running as an independent candidate, stipulated in the 2015 law on regional elections, has resulted in a smaller number of candidate pairs running in 269 regions for this year’s local elections.

So far, only 174 pairs have been approved by the General Elections Commission (KPU), while at least 80 pairs have failed the qualification process. The requirements for individual candidates have never been easy. However, Law no. 8/2015 makes local elections even tougher for them considering the increased number of minimum supporters required (recorded through collected identity cards) and the geographical spread of the supporters.

In fact, even in densely populated areas, the percentage of support required is 10 percent of the total population--not the number of voters!

This minimum level of support must come from at least 50 percent of the total number of districts for regent and mayoral candidates, and 50 percent of the total number of regencies or municipalities for gubernatorial candidates.

Independent candidacy in our local elections cannot be separated from the creation of new opportunities in the recent era of decentralization, which began in 2000. The major change was triggered when the Constitutional Court in 2007 annulled some clauses in Law No.32/2004 on local governments, which opened the door for non-partisan, or independent candidates.

This change was expected to provide a level playing field for all citizens whose qualifications met the requirements of public office, and also to ensure citizens’ freedom to select their candidates from the early stages of an election. During the direct elections in 2005-2008, as well as the regional elections by local legislative bodies, the public had no ability to influence the process of candidate selection, which was instead determined by their political parties. Now there is room for public involvement right from the announcement of a candidate’s name.

Since the new regulations came into effect, we have seen many non political party candidates, and a few who have won elections. Irwandi Yusuf became governor in Aceh, and independent candidates also became regents and mayors in places such as Batubara regency in North Sumatra, Garut regency in West Java, Kupang municipality, Sabu Rajua and Rote Ndao regencies in East Nusa Tenggara, Donggala regency in Central Sulawesi, and so on. In these areas, with their political and grassroots networks, popularity and skills, independent candidates have defeated the political party machines.

Regrettably, the independent path is still limited as an alternative route in the battlefield of political power.

Usually a candidate does not choose to run as an independent based on a conviction that it is a truly democratic mechanism. Rather, they are forced to take the option as they do not have the possibility of becoming party candidates due to unending internal conflicts within certain parties.

For instance Marthen Dira Tome, the Sabu Rajua regent who in the 2010 election was supported by Golkar, now has gone independent due to continuing uncertainty if the party will support his registration to run as regent again.

Such lack of confidence in non-partisan democracy is a common phenomenon: After succeeding in being elected, an independent candidate approaches a party, and even becomes a party member or board member, to gain support for their administration’s stability.

The failure to understand the meaning of an “independent” status can also be seen in the political performance of leaders--which for the most part is identical to that of regional heads nominated by political parties. They can also share the same cash-for-support politics of political party candidates.

One of the reasons to have independent candidates is to minimize the purchase of candidacy tickets from political parties. It has long been a public secret that candidacy for regional heads involves black market transactions between the party and the candidate. However, independent candidates have to mobilize the aforementioned minimal level of support, which also often involves monetary transactions.

Having observed the above practices, individual motivation for choosing the independent path is indeed also influenced by political power-seeking, rather than a desire to enhance the foundations of a fair and just political access at the local level. Such motivations are certainly not far from those who run for office as representatives of political parties. Thus the independent path is perceived solely as an alternative way to get through the front door. There is no difference in the ways candidates obtain support, perform their duty as elected officials, or implement creative policies for their constituencies.

In the future, regulations regarding independent candidates must be reformed for the sake of public freedom in the selection of candidates for local leaders, and political justice for the candidates themselves. Moreover, in the reform era, political parties have not gained much credibility as instruments for political recruitment which are just, open and reliable. Instead, parties are often wielded as bargaining tools in the black market of political power.

Improvement needs to start from the top. Requirements for candidacy have to encourage the emergence of numerous independent candidates. The minimum percentage of support, for example, should not be calculated based on the total population, but only on the basis of the number of registered, eligible voters. During campaigns, state facilities such as advertising in mass media have to consider issues of fairness and a level playing field between independent candidates and those from political parties with enormous capital resources.

Finally, we must be more creative in our search for an incentive system to encourage more independent candidates. We must create the spirit to build a democracy where almost every citizen is able to hold a public position and to grant the people’s basic right to nominate candidates they believe in.

Moreover, the independent candidate issue is not just a matter of an alternative procedure; the candidates should be alternatives with impeccable integrity and previous performance in office.

Without further affirmative measures at the legal and procedural level, and without encouraging a larger number of more suitable candidates, running as an independent will only be democratic in a cosmetic sense, or it will be merely complementary to the dominance of political parties.

Therefore, many regional leaders elected as independent candidates have performed poorly once elected, and failed to demonstrate that they are better alternatives to candidates from the parties.

--- (Source: The Jakarta Post - July 13, 2015) ---