Compulsory and Optional Voting -- Indonesia

This has appeared previously on en.hukumonline.com - here.

Optional and compulsory voting is always an issue that draws a great deal of commentary. However, when in a country such as Indonesia where voting in a general election is optional, the issuance of a fatwa by the Indonesian Ulema Council (Majelis Ulema Indonesia / MUI) is certain to ratchet up the rate in which commentators express their views, particularly when the fatwa states that not to vote is haram or prohibited where there are qualified Muslim candidates standing.

Indonesia has traditionally had a sizable number of individuals who choose not to exercise their democratic rights and vote. This group is referred to as the Golongan Putih or Golput group. They are in essence a group that abstains from voting. Whether this is an expression of dissatisfaction with the quality of the candidates being offered or a lack of interest is irrelevant. However, some have suggested that it is likely that somewhere around 40%, if not more, of registered voters will not exercise their right to vote in the 2009 elections.

The Muslim community seems split on whether Islam considers the expression of democratic freedom through a decision not to vote is haram. Abdurraham Wahid, who is affectionately known as Gus Dur and who is a former President of Indonesia and an influential figure in Nahdlatul Ulama (Indonesia’s largest Muslim organization), has been active in campaigning for people to take golput seriously.

On the other hand, the Prosperous Justice Party’s (PKS), Hidayat Nur Wahid, explicitly stated that golput is prohibited under Islam and has pro-actively campaigned for the MUI to issue the fatwa. Perhaps, somewhat cynically, Hidayat believes that the PKS is likely to benefit from those disaffected voters who feel compelled to comply with the fatwa.

The House of Representatives (DPR) have also weighed in on the matter with the Head of the DPR, Agung Laksono, arguing that the right to vote implicitly contains a right not to vote and as such golput cannot be haram. According to Laksono, political parties must take heed of the increasing numbers of golput-ers as a sign that political parties have failed in translating their respective visions into policies and action on the ground that positively affects the lives of their constituents. To his mind, the fatwa is a mistake.

The reaction to the fatwa has been widespread and varied. The National Commission on Human Rights (Komisi Nasional Hak Asasi Manusia / Komnas HAM) issued a press release on 2 February 2009 that states simply the fatwa is a violation of people’s human rights to exercise the right not to vote. Ifdhal Kasim, the Head of Komnas HAM, stated that the right to vote or not to vote was a basic human right that cannot and must not be interfered with.

He cites that this is a Constitutional guaranteed right that has been further strengthened with provisions in Law No. 39 of 199 and Law No. 2 of 2005. Ifdhal points out that the government has already ratified the International Convention on Civil and Political Rights, which means that “societies or government could not limit this right through prohibition, criminalization, or imposing moral sanctions on people who did not use their right to vote”.

The General Election Commission (Komisi Pemilihan Umum / KPU) who is tasked in carrying out the election, according to Ifdhal, is restricted by its mandate in that it does not allow them to issue any regulations which would impinge on the absolute rights of individuals to choose whether they vote or do not vote in a general election. However, the Head of the KPU, Abdul Hafiz Anshary, has been vocal in his support of the fatwa issued by the MUI. He has openly and publicly wondered why the MUI has only acted now on this issue.

According to Hafiz it is the MUI’s responsibility to supervise Muslims in order to see that Muslims exercise their rights in terms of voting for qualified Muslim candidates. In fact, Hafiz was unequivocal in stating that “not only cigarette are haram, but golput also haram.” This is in reference to another MUI fatwa that prohibits cigarette smoking in certain circumstances.

It is worth noting that MUI fatwas are not binding in a legal sense and it remains to be seen whether the fatwa has any moral force in terms of convincing potential golput-ers to vote.

(RAB / SH)

A Musing or A Ramble or a Bit of Both?

This year is an election year in Indonesia. That in and of itself will either excite people or bore the hell out of them. However, this little rambling musing is about change politics and the "yes, we can" philosophy seen recently in the US.

The Indonesian press and blogosphere has generally been pro-Obama and holds out high hopes that the new president of the US of A will be pro-Indonesia based on 4 or so years the man spent here as a child. The most recent warm and fuzzy moments relate to a You tube video doing the rounds showing the US president showing off his Indonesian language skills.

There are a couple of points to be made here. First, politics is always bigger than the person. Obama as president might be able to influence policy to some degree towards Indonesia, but the question is why do Indonesians think that this is such a positive? There was nothing in the campaign that he ran that would suggest that he is focusing on policy development related to Indonesia and nothing to say that this is going to be in Indonesia's benefit. Second, the love affair that Indonesians seem to have with the new US president highlights an extreme lack of hope in their own Indonesian politicians and the future of Indonesia.

Let's face it, when push comes to shove there are two possibilities being touted for Indonesia and depending on the day, it is either Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) or Megawati Soekarnoputri as the shoe-ins for the presidency of Indonesia. Why is this interesting? It is interesting because when it is all said and done this is politics as usual in Indonesia and not the change politics that the Indonesian media seem to have fallen for with Obama. It is also interesting because if the media really believed in change politics then the media would be excellent facilitators of promoting that change.

On Megawati, it must not be forgotten that Indonesia's most recent political assassination took place on her watch. The assassination of Munir has yet to see the "real" perpetrators of this crime identified, prosecuted, or jailed for their crimes. This is hardly an advertisement for a second crack at the big chair! It is also worth noting that Munir was particularly critical of SBY as being a military man with no commitment to investigating abuses of human rights, particularly in Aceh.

SBY has gone on the record as saying the investigation and prosecution is a test of his government's commitment to human rights and pursing justice for victims of abuses. He and his government have clearly failed this test.

The Indonesian political style of money dictating outcomes is rising its ugly head again, albeit in the form of crass public policy. The reduction of fuel prices is nothing but an attempt to draw votes by buying into the wallets of constituents and trying to avert attention aways from a poor record as president by SBY. Poor, is subjective but when you get elected with a change mandate like SBY, and then fail to deliver, it is fair that questions be asked of and on that record.

The most likely outcome is going to be people exercising their democratic right not to vote. This is known locally as Golput (golongan putih or the white group). I am anti-golput for many reasons, but most prevalent among these is that it is an affront to those who have laid down their lives to ensure that Indonesians achieved a "real" right to vote. It is a sad state of affairs that if among the 1000's of candidates that can be elected there is not one that represents your ideals, beliefs, hopes, and aspirations.

The idea that SBY or Megawati or someone else can reach the pinnacle of political power with a minority of voters electing them is sad. I accept that this is a feature of a non-compulsory voting system and even the grand old democracy known as the USA does not demand that its citizens vote if they do not want to. Yet, that is hardly the point.

Personally, I would vote and choose that minority candidate even if I was sure that they would not be elected. It is important that they know that they have support. Vote for the alternative candidate. It is also an equally effective way of showing the powers that be and those that do get elected that there are plenty of people out there who did not vote for them and place their faith in others.

I am the eternal optimist when it comes to all things Indonesian, and this is no different when it comes to matters of general and presidential elections.

Thus endeth this rambling musing.