A peaceful campaign declaration on Sept. 23, 2018, was a bit marred by an incident involving members of the political elite. Many are concerned that a peaceful campaign will result in nothing more than empty jargon.
By
·3 minutes read
A peaceful campaign declaration on Sept. 23, 2018, was a bit marred by an incident involving members of the political elite. Many are concerned that a peaceful campaign will result in nothing more than empty jargon.
Democratic Party chair Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono walked out from the declaration, reportedly in protest of the General Elections Commission (KPU) over several things he perceived as violating the rules of the declaration. That was Yudhoyono’s criticism toward the KPU, which has refuted the claims.
Chaos reigned on social media as a member of the political elite tweeted something that could be perceived as degrading a presidential election pair. The politician was then reported to the police for said tweet. Things went more chaotic after the tweet was discussed by mainstream media outlets, which promptly asked for opinions of other members of the political elite. The furor never ends.
Is this the form of peace that we expect in this campaign? A peaceful campaign should not merely be stage rhetoric. Signing a declaration alone is not enough. It demands commitment and responsibility. Furthermore, a peaceful campaign should not merely be a festival of ideas, without any competition between said ideas or plans to implement those ideas. A peaceful campaign must include efforts to dig deep into candidates’ visions and missions and to debate about them in public spaces.
We support the efforts by the Joko Widodo-Ma’ruf Amin and Prabowo Subianto-Sandiaga Uno pairs to explain their vision and mission statements. Jokowi’s vision and missions are focused on efforts of maintaining his path of change toward an advanced Indonesia: sovereign, independent, with character and based on a spirit of mutual assistance. Meanwhile, the Prabowo-Sandiaga pair will be campaigning on four pillars to bring prosperity to Indonesia.
In reading the visions and missions of both pairs, you will find that there are no significant differences. Both pairs wish for an economically and politically sovereign Indonesia. Prabowo-Sandiaga have placed more emphasis on a sovereign Indonesia that is just and prosperous in line with Article 33 of the 1945 Constitution. Meanwhile, the dominant keyword of the Jokowi-Ma’ruf Amin campaign seems to be mutual assistance.
In law, Jokowi and Ma’ruf wish for a law enforcement system that is trustworthy, dignified and corruption-free. Prabowo and Sandiaga, meanwhile, promote fairness and equality of all before the law.
They are such grand visions and mission statements that they should be more than just a supplementary document submitted to the KPU. Their operational implementation should be clear to help the people understand them. For instance, Jokowi and Ma’ruf should explain the “revitalization of mental revolution” concept in their vision and mission – what it means and how it can be achieved. Overly academic phrasings must be explained clearly so that the public knows what to expect.
Ideally, the campaign period is used to dig deep into candidates’ visions and mission statements, including in how to operationalize them in the language of the common people. Such a campaign, with a debate of ideas, will create a more rational election that encourages voters to use their common sense before making any decision.