Room for Leadership Selection 2024

In recent weeks, there has been an escalation in the mentioning of potential candidates for the 2024 presidential election.

The trigger was the release of surveys and also the opinions of observers and politicians. The escalation of the survey came from the release of survey results, both from well-established pollsters and those that just recently set up. The public and media focused on the level of fame and electability of individual candidates.

On the other hand, observers and politicians have also started to talk about the format of the candidate pairs. Interestingly, there are two categories of candidates that are often mentioned and sometimes even highlighted: the chairpersons of political parties and veteran politicians, namely politicians who in 2024 will be at least 70 years old.

Limiting selection

On the one hand, it is common for the names of political party chairpersons to be mentioned. Normatively, every political party must promote its best cadres, and the assumption used: the position of general chairman is an award given to the best cadres of the party.

This tendency is even more pronounced in political parties that are figure-based parties. The mentioning of Agus Harimurti Yudhoyono (AHY) and Prabowo Subianto is an example. The Democratic Party and the Gerindra Party are examples of parties that rely on figures or a person and thus, these parties are personalistic and personalist.

Also read:

> Preparing for the Great 2024 election

> Gearing Up for 2024

A person-based party is a party that relies on the charisma of its founder, who at the same time facilitates the provision of resources in a patronistic manner (Calisse, 2015). Similarly, a personalistic party is a party that was deliberately founded to fulfil the political ambitions of its founder (Gunther and Diamond, 2003). A personalist party is characterized by a concentration on the party leader, as well as a minimal or weakened party organizational capacity (Kostadinova and Levitt, 2014).

The rising of the name Muhaimin Iskandar or Puan Maharani and also Megawati is a logical consequence when the mass-based party transforms into a personalist party. Following Kostadinova and Levitt, in the context of leadership, the National Awakening Party (PKB) is a personalist party that does not rely on the charisma of the leader, but rather on Muhaimin\'s political skills in establishing his influence in the PKB.

KOMPAS/RADITYA HELABUMI

PDI-P General Chair Megawati Soekarnoputri and Gerindra Party Chair Prabowo Subianto at Megawati\'s residence on Jalan Teuku Umar, Jakarta, Wednesday (24/7/2019).

On the other hand, the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P) became a personalist party because Megawati\'s combination of charisma and political skills dominated the party structure. However, the appearance of the name of the general chairperson does not only come from party figures. The name Airlangga Hartarto, for example, should be read as an institutional political strategy. Following the typology of Kostadinova and Levitt, Golkar is an institutionalized party. The main strength is in the capacity of the organization, not the attractiveness of the party leader.

Regardless of the type of party, the appearance of the names of the general chairpersons of political parties has motives that tend to be intertwined. The need to increase awareness (Muhaimin, Airlangga, Puan) or increase electability (Prabowo, AHY) meets the need to build political bargaining power and consolidate parties. At the same time, the appearance of a seasoned politician is something that is beyond the expectations of many.

Previously, there was a hope that the 2019 presidential election would be the last political race for baby boomer generation politicians (born 1946 to 1964). This hope has the potential to fail, at least for two reasons. First, politicians from the silent generation (born before 1946) seem to still be able to fight and have a chance to win. The election of Biden (born 1942) or Ma\'ruf Amin (born 1943) seems to be a justification that old age is not always an obstacle from the electoral side.

Second, in the context of Indonesia, mentioning the names of seasoned politicians becomes more resonant when associated with the discourse that the president may hold office for three terms. If this discourse can pass in the People’s Consultative Assembly/House of Representatives (MPR-DPR), Joko “Jokowi” Widodo will have a chance. Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono/SBY (born 1949) is said to be the most commensurate opponent with Jokowi.

Also read:

> Coalition Models for 2024

> It’s Time to Empathize with the People

Not only that, Jusuf Kalla (born 1942) is also considered to have a great chance to become vice president for the third time.

The rebranding of the Megawati-Prabowo pair in the 2009 presidential election shows that seasoned politicians are still considered to have a chance to win the election. Moreover, in fact, seasoned politicians have a very strategic position in determining the candidates that will be promoted by their party. Megawati and Prabowo are the general chairmen of political parties, SBY is the chairman of the advisory board of the Democratic Party. In fact, despite not having a strategic position, Kalla is believed to still have some influence in Golkar.

However, on the other hand, early and massive discourse on general chairpersons and veteran politicians can also be interpreted as an effort to limit the selection process for candidate leaders in 2024. In this case, the selection process will be limited to one candidate, at least at the internal level of each party. This is part of symbolic politics to remind party cadres not to maneuver. It is also a political message to candidates outside the party that their opportunities are only maximized as companions.

In addition to discourse, efforts to limit the selection process are also carried out by encouraging the 2024 presidential election to be followed by only two pairs of candidates as in the 2014 and 2019 presidential elections. One way to do this is by maintaining the current presidential threshold. Along with that, there are efforts to encourage the formation of coalitions from an early age with classic reasons, such as creating permanent coalitions, streamlining elections and encouraging the formation of a strong government.

TANGKAPAN LAYAR AKUN INSTAGRAM RIDWAN KAMIL

Screenshot of Ridwan Kamil\'s Instagram account while talking with the Governor of DKI Jakarta Anies Baswedan (left) when they were about to pray at dawn, at the Great Mosque of Sumedang, Friday (11/6/2021).

Choose to lose

Even so, the opportunity is not completely closed to candidates who are not chairmen of political parties. A number of small and medium-sized parties have not acted or opened the door to candidates from internal or external parties. NasDem even took the bold step of “stealing the stage” with the idea of a convention. Although not a new idea, this idea is absolutely the antithesis of trying to limit the selection process. It is a challenge for NasDem to prove that the convention that will be implemented will not end in an anticlimax like what happened to the Democrats.

Equally important, the presidential election is still more than two years away. Politicians who are just ordinary cadres or who do not belong to a party (regional heads, religious leaders, celebrities, to elements of the TNI/Polri) still have a chance to be promoted. Indonesian politics is quite dynamic, all possibilities are still quite open. The assumption is that in time the political parties will act rationally. Eventually, they will see the electability trend. Potentially winning candidates will be supported.

The problem is that assumption can be violated. At least, there are three factors that could be the cause. First, political parties believe in their own calculations. In this case, political parties continue to support the general chairman of their own party whose electability trend is low or stagnant. They believe that the survey results can still be reversed along with the campaign process. This calculation is not just an illusion. At least, the 2014 and 2019 presidential elections show that it is almost possible to catch up with candidates who were originally predicted to win by a large margin.

Also read:

> Public Still Reserved About Presidential Candidates for 2024

> Focus on Overcoming the Pandemic, Postpone Political Maneuvering

There are many examples of successful dark horses winning political contestations. This is for example what Donald Trump did when he defeated Hillary Clinton in the 2016 US presidential election. In the context of regional election, the Ahmad Heryawan-Dede Yusuf pair did the same thing in the 2008 West Java gubernatorial election, and Ganjar Pranowo-Heru Sudjatmoko in the Central Java gubernatorial election. In the middle of 2013, Jokowi-Ahok also did this in the 2012 Jakarta gubernatorial election, as well as Anies Baswedan-Sandiaga Uno in the 2017 Jakarta gubernatorial election, to name a few examples.

Second, political parties consciously choose the "electoral suicide" strategy. This means that the political parties deliberately continue to carry the general chairperson of the party even though they have calculated that they will lose. What is being pursued is the coat-tail effect of the nomination. In this case, the presidential election is just an additional agenda to support the main agenda: the legislative elections. This can be an interesting choice because we believe that a permanent coalition will not materialize as happened in the 2019 presidential election. The chance to get a ministerial position in the Cabinet will still be open, especially if the party wins a significant number of seats in the House.

Still related to that, third, there are risk control efforts. The (general chairman) of the party tries to prevent further losses. In this case, political parties insist on nominating their own general chairman rather than appointing party cadres who are electorally more likely to win. This choice is made because the elite of political parties predicts the potential for fatal damage to the reputation of the organization if the cadre wins the presidential election. This is because it is suspected that these cadres can or are forced to make policies that are contrary to the political lines of political parties. In addition, the general chairman is very likely to have predictions that ordinary cadres may then have intention to take over the leadership of the party after being elected president or vice president.

KOMPAS/WAWAN H PRABOWO

Flags of political parties participating in the 2019 simultaneous elections decorate an elevated road on Jl. Kramat Raya, Senen, Central Jakarta, Tuesday (5/3/2019). In this political year, almost no public spaces are free from stickers, posters, banners, billboards, and political party flags, competing in the 2019 election.

Must build a coalition

The question arises, can the political party\'s unrealistic attitude be executed? If the presidential threshold is not lowered, only the PDI-P has the capacity. The party can nominate (its own candidate) independently because the number of seats in the House is more than the minimum limit of 20 percent, to be exact, 22.26 percent. This means that other

prominent parties that insist on nominating their general chairman must build a coalition themselves. The coalition will open the door for candidates from non-chairperson circles, both as presidential and vice-presidential candidates.

Not only that, the possibility of more than two pairs of candidates is still quite open. This means that there is an even greater opportunity for non-chairman candidates for political parties to "take the stage". Like this illustration. Say the PDI-P and Gerindra are in a coalition (36 percent), at least there are still two pairs of slots available.

For example, there are coalitions, say the “Anak Bangsa” or Children of the Nation (consisting of NasDem, the PKS and the PPP, which total 22 percent of the seats in the House) and the Democratic coalition (Democrats, PKB and PAN, about 27 percent). There is still Golkar that can join one of the three coalitions or split the last two coalitions.

Also read:

> Political Parties Going Nowhere

> Political Party Reform

Another alternative, but much more difficult, is for Golkar to ensure support from non-parliamentary political parties. Golkar can do this if it has a competitive candidate, in addition to continuing to promote Airlangga Hartarto as vice presidential candidate, for example. So, this will be a space for non-chairman candidates to appear in the 2024 presidential election.

According to the description above, efforts to narrow the path for the appearance of non-elite candidates (read: general chairperson of a political party) will face political realities (nomination requirements). At the same time, candidates for non-chairmanship are even more active in maneuvering to increase their electability. This clearly causes political psychological disturbances for the general chairmen of political parties.

No guarantee

The main message of this article is simple: opportunities for political competition must be more open. Chairpersons of political parties and those who are not general chairpersons of political parties should have relatively equal opportunities to be nominated. In a presidential system, political parties normally will look for the best candidate and of course the most likely to win. This is different from the parliamentary system, in which the head of the party is proposed as a candidate to become prime minister.

However, it must be admitted, there is no guarantee that we will get the best candidates even though the chances of candidacy become more open. As reminded by Pakulski (2013), in the era of centralization on leaders, the contestation is more focused on image than on policy or ideology. This cannot be separated from the great role of the mass media. Candidates who have high fame and electability do not guarantee high competence either.

Moreover, Pakulski also warned of the possibility of what he called a leadership vacuum. This is not because there are no leaders available to choose from, but because there are no qualified candidates for leadership.

In a situation like this, the political stage will only be filled by mediocre leaders. This type of leader, said Pakulski, tends to be opportunist, demagogue, and tends to win over victory rather than loyalty to the party (ideology). This clearly creates fragility for democracy.

Finally, every power has its own virus. One of them is what Musella (2018) calls the Iron Law of Leadership. The point is, when holding the reins of power, democratic and quality figures are also likely to continue to be tempted to maintain their power or expand their power. The latter can happen to non-chairman candidates. Once elected, they may, for one reason or another, be tempted to seize the leadership of the party that brings them. This will obviously interfere with the running of the government.

KOMPAS/AGUS SUSANTO

Yunarto Wijaya

We certainly hope to get the best leaders in 2024. However, we also need to prepare ourselves to get leaders with mediocre qualities. Therefore, the main thing we need to do is to strengthen democratic institutions. We need, for example, to ensure that checks and balances run, internal democratization in political parties is institutionalized, and also the realization of good and clean governance.

Yunarto Wijaya, Executive Director of Charta Politica Indonesia

This article was translated by Kurniawan Siswoko.