Lack of fresh faces in political leadership
Hanta Yuda A.R., A POLITICAL ANALYST WITH THE INDONESIAN INSTITUTE
Sumber : JAKARTA POST, 12 Desember 2011
The problem of regeneration in state leadership seems to be getting serious. This can be seen from the fact that almost all candidates who are likely to contest the next presidential election are old faces.
Judging by the latest surveys, the individuals who have the highest levels of public support as presidential candidates in 2014 will be in their 60s by then.
Most probably political parties will nominate old figures. The Golkar Party will most likely support one of their two senior figures: Aburizal Bakrie, 68 years, or Jusuf Kalla,72; The Indonesian Democratic Party for Struggle will probably continue with Megawati Sukarnoputri, 67, on the their ticket; The Democratic Party is likely to endorse Ani Yudhoyono, 62, and Joko Suyanto, 64; Gerindra will almost certainly nominate Prabowo Subianto, 63, and it seems PAN will opt for Hatta Radjasa, 61.
All of them hold top positions in their respective parties, with some of them having unsuccessfully contested the presidential election in 2004.
Among the relatively electable candidates, there are none from younger age groups. Ironically, this sluggish — if not belated — regeneration of state leadership is occurring at the same time when the democratic mechanisms in the selection of state leaders are better than those of the Old and New Orders. The question is what are the causes of slow regeneration in national leadership?
The circulation of the elite within parties is a consequence of the strong grip of the political gerontocracy on major political parties in Indonesia today.
Political parties in the reform era have power and positions that are very strong and strategic.
They seek to dominate the political leadership in the executive and legislative branches of the government — presidency, legislature and regional bodies — as well as determine the entire leadership of the judiciary — Supreme Court (MA) justices and Constitutional Court (MK) judges — and the state commissions through the processes in the House of Representatives (DPR).
Instead of cementing democracy by implementing a transparent selection system based on meritocracy, the parties are slowly pulling it down.
Instead of building democracy, they are failing to perform the functions of political recruitment in a democratic and transparent environment. At this point, the regeneration of leadership within the parties is stagnant and is impacting on regeneration in the national leadership.
The functions of political parties as the main institutions of democracy are still controlled by the old elite. The chairs of the boards of trustees and chairs of the parties — such as the consultative councils, advisory boards and Syuro (law-making) councils — which control the party machinery are still dominated by older people.
The success of the regeneration of political leadership will be a portrait of a success or a failure of the regeneration of the nation’s leadership at the national level.
In the reform era and since the 1945 Constitution was amended, political positions have determined the success of the national leadership.
The figures who are most likely to be endorsed by political parties in the 2014 presidential election are actors who currently control political parties.
Therefore, the reluctance of the older politicians to give an opportunity to young people and the ability and readiness of youth are factors inhibiting the regeneration of leadership in political parties.
The exclusive elite and the phenomenon of political gerontocracy may be influenced by the 32 years of the New Order regime.
The leadership of the New Order made the political machinery better accommodated to “older spare parts” always fitted to serve the power settings.
Meanwhile, young progressive leaders were kicked out from education and excluded from the political arena.
The opportunities for the emergence of new leaders can be increased when the monopoly of political parties in the recruitment of leaders is removed.
It is difficult to find potential leaders below 60 years of age with leadership skills that promise the appropriate level of electability and acceptability in the eyes of the public.
The project refreshing the leadership in political parties in terms of age is an unfinished Indonesian project. There are at least two agendas of democratization that should be scheduled by political parties.
First, the democratization of recruitment systems and public offices — the president, governors, regents, mayors and members of the legislative branch — within the parties through mechanisms that open the party convention, based on meritocracy, and involving all members of the parties.
Of course a democratic and transparent convention needs to be preceded by primary elections with the involvement of cadres and members as the major stakeholders in the parties.
Second, organizational modernization and democratization of decision-making systems by instituting a system of collective leadership is required.
This will slowly break the chain of oligarchies and political personalization to escape the dependence on personalities and a handful of elite figures.
In addition, there is a need for awareness and sincerity among older politicians to offer opportunities for young people to test their capabilities. Young people must become the deciding factor in the regeneration of national leadership.
The willingness of the older generation and the positive capital of the younger generation in the regeneration of national leadership are also necessary.
We need not only youth but new ideas and new political practices (young, competent, professional and anti-corruption). Therefore, to settle the national leadership, we should start by reforming the institutional systems of internal party politics. ●
Judging by the latest surveys, the individuals who have the highest levels of public support as presidential candidates in 2014 will be in their 60s by then.
Most probably political parties will nominate old figures. The Golkar Party will most likely support one of their two senior figures: Aburizal Bakrie, 68 years, or Jusuf Kalla,72; The Indonesian Democratic Party for Struggle will probably continue with Megawati Sukarnoputri, 67, on the their ticket; The Democratic Party is likely to endorse Ani Yudhoyono, 62, and Joko Suyanto, 64; Gerindra will almost certainly nominate Prabowo Subianto, 63, and it seems PAN will opt for Hatta Radjasa, 61.
All of them hold top positions in their respective parties, with some of them having unsuccessfully contested the presidential election in 2004.
Among the relatively electable candidates, there are none from younger age groups. Ironically, this sluggish — if not belated — regeneration of state leadership is occurring at the same time when the democratic mechanisms in the selection of state leaders are better than those of the Old and New Orders. The question is what are the causes of slow regeneration in national leadership?
The circulation of the elite within parties is a consequence of the strong grip of the political gerontocracy on major political parties in Indonesia today.
Political parties in the reform era have power and positions that are very strong and strategic.
They seek to dominate the political leadership in the executive and legislative branches of the government — presidency, legislature and regional bodies — as well as determine the entire leadership of the judiciary — Supreme Court (MA) justices and Constitutional Court (MK) judges — and the state commissions through the processes in the House of Representatives (DPR).
Instead of cementing democracy by implementing a transparent selection system based on meritocracy, the parties are slowly pulling it down.
Instead of building democracy, they are failing to perform the functions of political recruitment in a democratic and transparent environment. At this point, the regeneration of leadership within the parties is stagnant and is impacting on regeneration in the national leadership.
The functions of political parties as the main institutions of democracy are still controlled by the old elite. The chairs of the boards of trustees and chairs of the parties — such as the consultative councils, advisory boards and Syuro (law-making) councils — which control the party machinery are still dominated by older people.
The success of the regeneration of political leadership will be a portrait of a success or a failure of the regeneration of the nation’s leadership at the national level.
In the reform era and since the 1945 Constitution was amended, political positions have determined the success of the national leadership.
The figures who are most likely to be endorsed by political parties in the 2014 presidential election are actors who currently control political parties.
Therefore, the reluctance of the older politicians to give an opportunity to young people and the ability and readiness of youth are factors inhibiting the regeneration of leadership in political parties.
The exclusive elite and the phenomenon of political gerontocracy may be influenced by the 32 years of the New Order regime.
The leadership of the New Order made the political machinery better accommodated to “older spare parts” always fitted to serve the power settings.
Meanwhile, young progressive leaders were kicked out from education and excluded from the political arena.
The opportunities for the emergence of new leaders can be increased when the monopoly of political parties in the recruitment of leaders is removed.
It is difficult to find potential leaders below 60 years of age with leadership skills that promise the appropriate level of electability and acceptability in the eyes of the public.
The project refreshing the leadership in political parties in terms of age is an unfinished Indonesian project. There are at least two agendas of democratization that should be scheduled by political parties.
First, the democratization of recruitment systems and public offices — the president, governors, regents, mayors and members of the legislative branch — within the parties through mechanisms that open the party convention, based on meritocracy, and involving all members of the parties.
Of course a democratic and transparent convention needs to be preceded by primary elections with the involvement of cadres and members as the major stakeholders in the parties.
Second, organizational modernization and democratization of decision-making systems by instituting a system of collective leadership is required.
This will slowly break the chain of oligarchies and political personalization to escape the dependence on personalities and a handful of elite figures.
In addition, there is a need for awareness and sincerity among older politicians to offer opportunities for young people to test their capabilities. Young people must become the deciding factor in the regeneration of national leadership.
The willingness of the older generation and the positive capital of the younger generation in the regeneration of national leadership are also necessary.
We need not only youth but new ideas and new political practices (young, competent, professional and anti-corruption). Therefore, to settle the national leadership, we should start by reforming the institutional systems of internal party politics. ●
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar