It is necessary for civil society to mobilize public awareness on the dangers of the oligarchy. It also needs to build citizens\' assertive approach to rejecting every form of political and economic-financial oligarchy.
By
AZYUMARDI AZRA
·6 minutes read
ABK
Azyumardi Azra
The intensifying oligarchy has been one of the most prominent phenomena in the development of Indonesian politics over the last several years. Many political institutions and observers have mentioned this phenomenon as one of the main indicators of the decline of Indonesian democracy. The oligarchy continues to expand as the corpulent political coalition in the House of Representatives (DPR) strengthens. The huge government coalition, comprising the factions of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (F-PDIP), the Golkar Party (F-PG), the Nasdem (F-Nasdem), the National Awakening Party (F-PKB), Gerindra (F-Gerindra), the United Development Party (F-PPP), and the National Mandate Party (F-PAN), can take many political steps. The remaining two factions of the Prosperous Justice Party (F-PKS) and the Democratic Party (F-Partai Demokrat) are nearly powerless to stop it.
The almost unstoppable intensification of the oligarchy can be seen in a number of political steps taken by top public officials and the political elite in both the executive and the judiciary. Those who can be called political "oligarchs" frequently make decisions regarding the public interest in their own circles, without significantly involving the broader public represented by civil society organizations, professional unions, mass organizations, and NGOs.
This fact is clearly seen in the DPR’s legislative process since the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) Law and the Minerals and Coal Mining (Minerba) Law were revised, as well as in the submission of the Job Creation Bill, which was prepared as an omnibus law. The executive and legislative oligarchy determined the amendments to and ratification of these laws without significantly involving the public. In the civil lawsuits against these various laws, the political oligarchy has the support of the judiciary (Constitutional Court and Supreme Court).
The development of the political oligarchy in Indonesia, in certain respects, is different from that in several other countries. The list published in Oligarchy Countries (2021) contains 11 countries, including China, Russia, and the United States. The oligarchy of these countries is formed among the economic and financial oligarchies, namely the superwealthy or the wealthy that have strong alliances with the political oligarchy. In the US, big corporate oligarchs and the superrich are more decisive in political decision-making than the country’s hundreds of millions of voters.
What about the typology of oligarchs and the oligarchy in Indonesia? In the eras of president Soekarno and president Soeharto, political and financial oligarchies did not really exist. President Soekarno was the “sole ruler” during the Guided Democracy period (1959-1965), when he was at the center of all practical decisions. During the Pancasila democracy of president Soeharto, power was initially centralized in him, and he made decisions without involving three political parties, let alone the wider public. However, the phenomenon of "financial oligarchs", or cukong, has been emerging since the era of president Soeharto.
The political oligarchy that had a network with the cukong oligarchs – the superrich at the national level and the wealthy at the local level – grew rapidly during the Reform Era. The reasons are: First, Indonesia’s liberal democracy politics is fragmented among many political parties. Due to inadequate funding, the political party elite tries to obtain financial support from the superrich or the rich.
Second, since the 1999 legislative elections, the candidates’ campaign costs have become increasingly high. According to the Autonomous Region (Otda) Institute (2021), for example, the campaign costs for a DPR legislative candidate range from Rp 1 billion to Rp 2 billion, and from Rp 5 trillion to Rp 20 trillion for a presidential candidate.
KOMPAS/RADITYA HELABUMI
A number of activists staged a theatrical action of the #CleanIndonesia Movement with the theme of the Minerba Law for Corporations, People Sue at the Arjuna Wijaya Horse Statue area, Central Jakarta, Monday (21/6/2021). The action is to provide support for submitting a petition for a judicial review to the Constitutional Court on a number of problematic articles in the Minerba Law No. 3 of 2020.
Political liberalization through the various elections has further strengthened the positions of the cukong and political oligarchs. It has also had a negative impact on democracy and law enforcement, with the most obvious case the weakening of the KPK. Oligarchs always try to make the lawmaking process and law enforcement profitable and strengthen their positions in the political and economic-financial oligarchy.Indonesia\'s political system and praxis is a democracy based on the people’s sovereignty, which does not align with the political oligarchy and is intertwined with the economic-financial oligarchy and therefore must be curbed. Having a political oligarchy is not common, with only 11 oligarchic countries out of 195 countries.
There is skepticism among political scientists and the public over the theory of the "iron law of the oligarchy". To quote the theories of German sociologist Robert Michels as posited in his book Political Parties (1911), "rule by an elite (oligarchy) is inevitable as an iron law within any democratic organization as part of the ‘tactical and technical necessities’ of organization". In the case of the Social Democratic Party of Germany, Michels argued that the workers\' political party, which was democratically established, eventually came under the control of the "leading elite" (oligarchy).
However, the "iron law of oligarchy" theory has been countered by many other political scientists such as Seymour Martin Lipset (1956), who stated that exceptions could be developed from the raison d\'être of the establishment of institutions like the state in line with democratic principles, the process of leadership formation and succession through control and balance, as well as the development of the socioeconomic welfare of the citizens.
Lipset\'s suggestion is relevant to the efforts to curb the oligarchy in Indonesia, and can be developed by modifying the framework that Zephyr Teachout and Kelly Nuxoll propose in Three Solutions to the Oligarchy Problem (2013). First, it is necessary to amend the Elections Law, especially regarding the "legislative threshold". Second, it is necessary to review the regional elections through reelections at representative institutions. Third, there is a need for strict law enforcement in the funding of parties and candidates during the nomination period and through to the election campaign.
It is necessary for civil society to mobilize public awareness on the dangers of the oligarchy. Moreover, it also needs to build citizens\' assertive approach to rejecting every form of political and economic-financial oligarchy, which is highly detrimental to the nation-state.
AZYUMARDI AZRA, History professor, Syarif Hidayatullah State Islamic University (UIN) Jakarta; member, the Indonesian Academy of Sciences Culture Commission (KK AIPI).
/https%3A%2F%2Fkompas.id%2Fwp-content%2Fuploads%2F2021%2F06%2F4b313a82-77dd-417a-9291-c9a5ecf959cf_jpg.jpg){kind=logo}
