The competition to increase their electability has led to political parties resorting to pragmatism. Legislative candidates with high popularity have been recruited without considering their sense of loyalty, integrity and professionalism.
By
Arita Nugraheni
·5 minutes read
ANTARA FOTO/PUSPA PERWITASARI
.
The competition to increase their electability has led to political parties resorting to pragmatism. Legislative candidates with high popularity have been recruited without considering their sense of loyalty, integrity and professionalism.
As the General Elections Commission’s (KPU) registration period for legislative candidates ended, the public observed the political parties’ practice in recruiting legislative candidates, from their selection to their registration with the KPU. When registration closed on Tuesday night (17/7/2018), the KPU had files on 8,401 prospected candidates for the House of Representatives that hailed from 80 electoral districts and 16 political parties. =
The public is pessimistic about the quality of the legislative candidates the political parties have nominated, a perception that arose because of the pragmatism that dominated political parties in recruiting their candidates. Several political parties that lacked confidence in their own cadres contesting against each other grasped at popular public figures and officials to boost their electability. Understandably, the phenomenon of party switching and public figures suddenly turning politician have become common ahead of the 2019 general election.
The response to the phenomenon was loud and clear in last week’s Kompas survey. The poll showed that the public was pessimistic over the political parties’ commitment to improve the quality of democracy through an appropriate recruitment system. The people viewed political parties as prioritizing candidates that were electorally beneficial at the expense of quality candidates with strong values, including loyalty, integrity, professionalism and a good track record.
As much as 48.2 percent of respondents said the political parties had prioritized popularity over loyalty and dedication in recruiting their candidates, while 48.3 percent of respondents rejected the view.
On the other hand, the survey also captured the respondents’ views on the phenomenon of party-switching candidates. They said that political parties tended to prioritize recruiting established figures of other political parties, including both lawmakers and potential cadres. More than half of respondents (53.4 percent) agreed that political parties recruited established lawmakers and potential members of other parties to increase their own electability.
Effective strategy
The strategy of political parties in nominating popular figures, especially public figures and officials, has apparently been effective in overcoming their failure at nurturing their own cadres. At least 10 political parties have nominated public figures and celebrities as their candidates. The Nasdem Party and the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) have the highest number of celebrities among their respective candidates. Nasdem has nominated 25 celebrities, while the PDI-P has nominated 10.
Kompas Research and Development’s study shows that the number of celebrities nominated as legislative candidates has increased for the 2019 election compared to the 2014 election. The 2019 election will see 70 celebrities competing for House seats, while the 2014 election saw only 60 celebrities.
Political parties are also seeking to exploit the popularity of established members by putting them up for reelection. Furthermore, political parties are also snaring popular former members of other parties as their own candidates. The latest data shows that 19 current lawmakers have switched allegiance ahead of the 2019 election.
Nasdem has nominated 14 former members of other political parties, including five former members of the People’s Conscience Party (Hanura), four former Democratics, two former National Mandate Party (PAN) members and one former member each from the United Development Party (PPP), the National Awakening Party (PKB) and the Gerindra Party.
In contrast, Hanura has “lost” the greatest number of potential candidates. Apart from the five switching to Nasdem, two Hanura politicians have switched to PAN and one each has gone to the PPP, PAN and the Prosperous Justice Party (PKS). Golkar has seen two of its politicians jumping ship to Berkarya, Hutomo Mandala Putra “Tommy” Soeharto’s new party. Many more politicians have switched parties compared to five years ago. Kompas reported on Apr. 6, 2013 that only four politicians had switched parties ahead of the 2014 election.
This party-switching phenomenon among politicians has been triggered by parties’ relative lenience toward their members’ loyalty to both the party and their constituents. Politicians calculating their victory in elections have worsened the condition. This opportunism among politicians, coupled with the pragmatism dominating parties, has led to legislative candidates with little sense of loyalty. Many survey respondents agreed to this.
The survey result shows that respondents are pessimistic about the political parties’ commitment to nurturing their candidates’ loyalty. Only 48.1 percent of respondents believed that political parties placed their candidates’ loyalty to constituents and the party as an absolute requirement.
Former corruption convicts
The public has become increasingly pessimistic about the political parties’ committed efforts to improve the quality of legislative candidates. Even though 56.2 percent of respondents believed that political parties included “free from signs of corruption” as a requirement for candidacy, another 41 percent of respondents remained unconvinced. The inclusion of former corruption convicts on the candidates list of certain political parties has given rise to the public questioning the parties’ commitment to supporting corruption eradication.
On the other hand, competition for House seats has increased between legislative candidates in the 2019 election. Some 8,401 candidates from 80 electoral districts will compete for 575 House seats. Assuming that all candidates pass the KPU’s verification process, this means that 14 candidates will be competing for a single House seat. The competition is tighter than in 2014, when 6,607 candidates from 77 electoral districts competed for 550 House seats, meaning that 12 candidates competed for a single House seat.
Some 56.5 percent of respondents believed that the candidates’ popularity was an important factor in the political parties’ support for their candidacy. This is despite the fact that 43.2 percent of respondents prioritized corruption free as the main qualification for legislative candidates, followed by integrity and loyalty.
This discrepancy between the public’s wishes for legislative candidates with high integrity and quality and the political parties’ priorities shows how political parties are orientated primarily toward victory. If such a condition prevails, it is difficult to expect that the quality of our democracy will improve.
