Indonesian Democratic Climate Between Joko Widodo and SBY’s Reign
Jokowi in the government system relied a lot on the military to assist in his duties. The role of the military dominates several important sectors such as the disaster management sector, handling COVID-19, and controlling demonstrations.
Irsyad Ade, Secretary of Regional Leadership Council (DPD) Confederation of Trade Unions Throughout Indonesia (KSPI)
Indonesia’s democratic system has experienced a downward trend from year to year since the reign of President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono (SBY) until the reign of Joko Widodo, this can be seen from a survey conducted by The Economist Intelligence Unit (EIU) which shows Indonesia is ranked 64th out of 167 countries in the 2021 global democracy index list.
Indonesia recorded a score of 6.48 points on a scale of 0-10, the current condition of Indonesia’s democracy index tends to be low when compared to the previous year. Indonesia was ranked 48th with a score of 6.79 in 2016. The score slumped in 2017 which made Indonesia stagnate at 68th.
Many factors affect the decline of a country’s democracy, including the freedom to express opinions to criticize government policies that are considered not to prosper the people to the weakness of law enforcement efforts that make a country’s democracy index decrease.
During the SBY administration, Indonesia was known for its excellent procedural democracy. This is because SBY is known as a president who is good at making a government system with a procedural democratic system but lacks substance that directly touches the interests of the community. Indonesia’s democratic system under SBY’s administration is running quite well, this can be seen from the existence of general elections (elections) which are held regularly periodically and everything is relatively safe.
However, in its development, efforts to improve democracy in the SBY era were injured by the attitude of SBY and his supporting party (Democratic party) which gave room for the victory of the Pilkada (Regional Election) Law which made regional head elections handed over to the DPRD. In addition to the problem of the emergence of the Pilkada Law in the SBY era made the public disappointed with the policies he took because it was considered inconsistent in efforts to enforce democracy in Indonesia. SBY was also faced with the problem of weak law enforcement and protection of minority groups which in turn hampered Indonesia’s democratic system substantively.
Political observer at the University of Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta (UMY), Tunjung Sulaksono said, during the SBY administration there were many omissions against anti-democratic forces, especially in terms of freedom of worship. This clearly can disturb public peace.
“SBY actually uses an inconsistent democratic system, on the other hand SBY supports a democratic climate but on the other hand he also issues an election law that does not reflect democracy. During SBY’s time, there were anti-democratic forces that seemed to be deliberately ignored and no immediate action was taken to overcome this, so it is not surprising that the public today considers SBY weak in terms of legal protection for minorities.”
Tunjung Sulaksono, Political Observer at the University of Muhammadiyah Yogyakarta (UMY)
Government control during the SBY era tends to be more stable because the number of opposition in the DPR is considered balanced. The presence of the opposition can be a means of controlling the government system if later the government takes policies that can harm the people, the opposition can act as a controller of the democratic system so that an authoritarian system of government does not occur.
The climate of freedom of expression during the SBY administration is considered more pronounced when compared to the Jokowi era. This is because SBY maintains the normativity of democratic functions so that, even though at the lower level the conditions are not much different, at the formal level the atmosphere that has been built is more democratic in SBY’s time.
One example, when there is a political problem related to the function of the state, there is a clash between state institutions, SBY looks serious in clarifying to the public. SBY opened wide spaces for expressing opinions in public or criticizing government policies. There is no repressive pressure from the military that can silence people’s aspirations to express their opinions.
The freedom of opinion in the SBY era was seen in the case of public demonstrations against the revision of the ITE Law and the revision of the labor law, in this case SBY was considered to have paid enough attention to the aspirations of the people regarding this issue. The demonstrations carried out by the community finally paid off, the president at that time decided not to revise the ITE Law and the Manpower Law which was considered to be detrimental to the community and only benefited certain political elites. Tunjung Sulaksono revealed that there are separate records regarding law enforcement efforts and the role of the KPK during the SBY administration.
During the SBY era, the KPK was considered to still be able to process Democratic party cadres who were caught in corruption cases. In fact, the Corruption Eradication Commission (KPK) ensnared high-ranking Democrats such as Anas Urbaningrum, Nazarudin and Andi Mallarangeng. SBY did not seem to interfere with the arrest of high-ranking cadres of the Democratic party who stumbled upon a corruption case. SBY handed over the entire legal process to the KPK as aas an independent state institution in the eyes of the law. However, the role of the KPK in law enforcement efforts in Indonesia during the SBY administration cannot be said to have had a brilliant achievement.
“In SBY’s leadership, 6 anti-corruption policies were born in the form of presidential instructions and presidential regulations, but in reality this does not make Indonesia able to fight corruption. SBY is indeed very creative and rich in anti-corruption plans and strategies, but very minimal implementation,” he explained.
SBY became one of the presidents of the Republic of Indonesia who issued the most anti-corruption policies in Indonesian history. However, this policy seems to be an appeal because there is no monitoring and evaluation as well as sanctions if this policy is not implemented by the relevant parties under SBY’s leadership.
Throughout the 10 years of his reign, SBY did not escape from several major cases that ensnared his name because he had a big role in the legal case. Some cases even have not been resolved until now. Some of the major cases that existed during the SBY administration include: the Century (bank) case, the KPK criminalization case which dragged the name of Antasari Azhar, the chairman of the KPK at that time, the tax mafia case, the Joint Secretariat case, the border conflict with Malaysia and the Attorney General Hendarman Supandji case.
Tunjung Sulaksono
In contrast to the relatively stable democratic climate during the SBY administration, the democratic climate during the leadership of President Jokowi is volatile and tends to decline in recent times. According to BPS data, the Indonesian Democracy Index during the early period of Jokowi’s leadership in 2015 experienced a downward trend. There are 2 indicators that indicate a sharp decline in the democratic climate of the Jokowi era due to the decline in people’s freedom of expression and the low level of political culture which has decreased by 20 percent in the last 10 years.
The downward trend in the Jokowi-era democracy index was seen in 2017 during the DKI regional elections, then continued to the simultaneous regional elections until the 2019 elections. Even the 2020 elections are closely related to identity politics which is used as a political instrument in electoral contestation.
President Jokowi adheres to a pragmatic administrative democratic system so that it does not appear to be in favor of democratic normativity. When compared to what happened in the SBY era, the Jokowi era looks like the New Order Neo where political-economic pragmatism is more at the fore than democratic normativity. This further confirms that there is a decline in democracy.
Jokowi has often voiced his commitment to safeguarding democracy, but in reality, many repressive and anti-democratic government policies and actions were produced under his leadership.
Tunjung Sulaksono
Among them is Jokowi’s decision to support the ratification of the revision of the Corruption Eradication Commission Law (UU KPK) and the Draft Criminal Code (RKUHP) which were opposed by many parties but were eventually passed and passed. Another example can be seen from how the attitude of the security forces in securing demonstrations in various cities against the revision of the KPK Law and the RKUHP was also marked by anti-democratic repressive actions. During this demonstration, two students died after clashing with police in Kendari, Southeast Sulawesi. Dozens of students were arrested, activists were detained and even the government would impose sanctions on universities whose students were involved in demonstrations.
This incident shows that the policies that emerged during the Jokowi leadership era have eroded Indonesia’s democratic climate. Since his leadership, several policies issued by President Jokowi seem to try to weaken democracy. The issuance of Government Regulation in Lieu of Law (perppu) No. 2 of 2017 concerning Community Organizations (Ormas) and Presidential Regulation (Perpres) No. 37 of 2019 concerning the Functional Positions of the Indonesian National Armed Forces (TNI).
The Perppu on mass organizations used by the government to dissolve Hizb ut-Tahrir Indonesia, although correct in substance, is procedurally flawed because it eliminates the judicial process. In addition, the presidential regulation for the position of the TNI is also considered to be in conflict with the law and the spirit of reform.
The Presidential Decree on the position of the TNI has worried civil society, because during the New Order era, the dual function of ABRI became a tool of authoritarianism that facilitated many human rights violations and perpetuated power. The public certainly does not want this to happen again under Jokowi’s leadership.
During Jokowi’s 2-term leadership, the democracy index in Indonesia decreased by 0.58 points from 2016 to 6.39 in 2017 and 2018. The Central Statistics Agency noted that in 2018, Indonesia experienced a decline in the civil liberties aspect index of 0.29 points, and on the aspect of political rights it decreased by 0.84 points compared to 2017.
Political observer of the State Islamic University (UIN) Sunan Kalijaga, Ahmad Norma Permata said the oppositionduring the Jokowi administration was very unbalanced. This is not very good for the democratic climate in Indonesia because there is no control on the government if the number of opposition in the government system in the DPR is too small.
Efforts to weaken the democratic system in Jokowi’s era were felt when the political elites in this case were the opposition who were previously at odds with the government, now there are many oppositions who are in coalition with the government. This will make the democratic system in Indonesia more difficult to realize.
Ahmad Norma Permata, Political Observer of UIN Sunan Kalijaga
“The lack of opposition in the government system makes it easy for all controversial policies made under President Jokowi to be passed without significant obstacles. This can be seen from the absence of rejection from the opposition camp against controversial bills and laws discussed in the DPR such as the revision of the ITE Law, the revision of the KPK Law to the revision of the Job Creation Law, almost all factions in the DPR agree with Jokowi’s controversial policies,” explained the lecturer in Political Sociology.
The Jokowi government does not seem to pay full attention to law enforcement efforts in Indonesia, this can be seen in the weak role and performance of the KPK during the Jokowi administration. Two things that are indicators of efforts to weaken law enforcement lie in the emergence of polarization in the form of religious and ethnic barriers that continue to develop in the 2019 Presidential Election with the emergence of left and right populism wars. Polarization has continued to strengthen in society since the Jakarta gubernatorial election in 2017. The struggle for the Jakarta governor seat between Basuki Tjahaja Purnama, a Chinese-Christian politician and Anies Baswedan, an Arab-Islamic politician has made polarization in religious and ethnic barriers even more pronounced in the Jokowi era.
Efforts to weaken the law also occurred in the Constitutional Court (MK). In 2006, the Constitutional Court declared the offense of insulting the president in the Criminal Code (KUHP) to be contrary to the 1945 Constitution and decided that the offense was no longer used to hinder criticism and protest against government policies.
However, in 2015, the offense of insulting the president was again included in the draft amendments to the Criminal Code, which is now being discussed again after being suspended several months after the massive demonstrations at the end of 2019.
The Corruption Eradication Commission also experienced disturbances in the supervision and balance system, whose authority was eroded through the passage of the KPK Law. A number of revised articles that are considered to weaken the KPK, among others, change the status of the KPK to an executive state institution and its employees are listed as state civil servants.
“Public efforts to reject (the revision of the KPK Law) appeared in demonstrations that were attended by many students in 2019. But unfortunately the government handled it badly, the government used violent means by deploying the military to deal with demonstrations that ended in chaos,” said Ahmad.
The corruption eradication program does not appear to be the Jokowi administration’s top priority. In the first two years, Jokowi prioritized the birth of a number of economic policy packages and the consolidation of political parties supporting the government. The package of legal reform policies and eradication of corruption and illegal levies was only implemented before the third year of government.
In less than 3 years of his reign, many regulations related to corruption eradication efforts have not been finalized, such as the Asset Confiscation Bill, the Reciprocal Cooperation Bill and the Cash Transaction Limitation Bill. A number of anti-corruption policies, such as the Presidential Regulation on the National Action Plan for the Prevention and Eradication of Corruption, are often published late and lack evaluation in their implementation.
The climate for freedom of expression in the Jokowi era is considered worse than the climate for freedom of expression under SBY’s leadership. The Electronic Information and Transactions Law (UU ITE) has become the biggest obstacle to the freedom of expression of Indonesian citizens in recent years. The rubber article contained in the law is a scourge for citizens to express opinions, which should be guaranteed by national and international law.
Secretary of the Regional Leadership Council (DPD) of KSPSI Yogyakarta, Irsyad Ade Irawan, revealed that freedom of opinion and expression in the Jokowi era was very limited, as in the submission of objections to the ratification of the Job Creation Act (Omnibus Law). During demonstrations against the job creation law, 5,918 people were arrested and only 240 were found guilty. Those who express opinions that are contrary to the government’s narrative are also not spared from repression with accusations of hate speech and incitement.
“The decline in the quality of freedom of expression, starting from the freedom of expression of the citizens, freedom of the media, and also the freedom of expression of citizens who want to be in opposition is increasingly widespread in the Jokowi leadership era. People will be afraid to voice their aspirations in public because later they can be caught in the ITE Law regarding incitement or spreading various kinds ofhoax news that has the potential to cause riots,” said Irsyad.
Under the Jokowi administration, the EIU noted that the civil liberties indicator fell from 34 points in 2018 to 32 in 2019. Meanwhile, the freedom of expression index fell from 12 from 2015 to 11 in 2019. The increasing number of cases arising from the misuse of the ITE Law led to a decline in Indonesia’s freedom index. from the SBY administration to Jokowi.
The misuse of the ITE Law is caused by several factors, one of which is the regulation that is too broad and not well defined. In addition, the ITE Law also does not clearly distinguish between insulting and defaming, even though both things are clearly regulated in the Criminal Code. Before the ITE Law came into effect, the perpetrators of defamation were charged using Articles 310-321 of the Criminal Code (KUHP). The ambiguous existence of the ITE Law makes this law vulnerable to misuse. Loose formulations are also easily misused by law enforcement in proving.
Irsyad added that the decline in freedom of expression seems to be caused by the strengthening role of the military using excessive authority in maintaining the good name of government institutions, especially the president. In its journey, the Constitutional Court has always rejected the lawsuits filed regarding the ITE Law because they still believe in the importance of this law. The Court thinks that without this article, people are free to insult other people.
In addition, there is a political interest from the authorities to defend this law because the authorities can criminalize critical voices who are considered insulting or hate the president and the authorities use this law.
“What can be done is to encourage the elimination of articles of the ITE Law which are prone to being misused to limit freedom of expression. At the very least, the steps that need to be taken further by the government are to encourage non-criminal channels, so that those who violate the ITE Law do not need to be sentenced to prison but must pay a fine,” he explained.
Secretary of Regional Leadership Council (DPD) Confederation of Trade Unions Throughout Indonesia (KSPI) mentioned the weaknesses of SBY’s democratic system and underlined the inconsistencies that occurred during SBY’s time. On the one hand, SBY issued a lot of anti-corruption laws but minimal implementation.
Apart from that, without many people realizing it, the corruption octopus actually affects SBY’s family, friends and relatives. One example is SBY’s inconsistency in law enforcement when a joint secretariat case (Setgab) occurred. in this case the Joint Secretariat (Setgab). Setgab is an association of coalition parties chaired by the Chairman of the Advisory Board of the Democratic Party Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono and Aburizal Bakrie as the daily chief executive. Setgab was established to bridge between the executive and politics in the legislature. Setgab has caused controversy because it is often judged to have the same authority as the government.
Irsyad also criticises democracy during the Jokowi era. According to him, Jokowi in the government system relied a lot on the military to assist in his duties. The role of the military dominates several important sectors such as the disaster management sector, handling COVID-19, and controlling demonstrations.
“The large role of the military in the Jokowi era made the Indonesian demonstration climate decline, especially in terms of expressing opinions that were contrary to the president” Irsyad told to The Apex Chronicles.
Economic
In addition to the democratic climate, the climate of economic growth during the SBY and Jokowi administrations was also widely highlighted by the public. During the SBY administration, economic growth was higher than the Jokowi era. This is due to rising global commodity prices. In contrast to conditions in the Jokowi era, a number of commodity prices fell. Not only that, the condition is also exacerbated by the trade war between the United States (US) and China.
During the ten years of SBY’s leadership, economic growth accelerated in the range of 5-6 percent. The highest achievement was in 2011 at 6.5 percent and the lowest was in 2009 with 4.5 percent economic growth. The portion of the infrastructure budget during the SBY administration was less than the infrastructure budget during the Jokowi era. The SBY era infrastructure budget was less than 8 percent in the APBN. Meanwhile, the budget is quite large lies in energy subsidies, reaching 19 percent. During the SBY administration, the price of oil had penetrated its highest level, reaching USD 146 per barrel in July 2008. So the focus of the government at that time was to increase energy subsidies for the people. The addition of the infrastructure budget was carried out under President Jokowi. The construction sector continues to show an upward trend. In addition, GDP is also supported by the agriculture, forestry, and fisheries sectors; processing industry; and wholesale and retail trade.
According to BPS data, economic growth was recorded at 4.79 percent in 2015. In the following years, this figure did not increase significantly. Economic growth was recorded in 2016 of 5.02 percent and in 2017 of 5.07 percent.
The factors that influence economic growth in each era are different depending on the policies of the president. In the SBY era, the government chose macroeconomic and political stabilization with large energy subsidies. While the Jokowi administration has put more emphasis on the aspect of increasing infrastructure development in recent years, this could become a new pillar of economic development in the future.
President Jokowi’s state debt rose by 150 percent. This debt is an accumulation of debt inherited from the era of President SBY of IDR 2,700 trillion, President Jokowi’s debt to date amounts to IDR 6,336 trillion.
Citing data from the Directorate General of Financing and Risk Management at the Ministry of Finance, the Indonesian government’s foreign debt as of December 31, 2004 was US$68.57 billion. Indonesia’s government debt from abroad has had its ups and downs. On December 31, 2005, Indonesia’s government debt fell to US$63.09 billion. Then in 2006 the government debt became 62.03 billion US dollars, in 2007 it became 62.25 billion US dollars, in 2008 it became 65.44 billion US dollars. Towards the end of the first term of President SBY’s administration, the Indonesian government’s debt was 63.20 billion US dollars.
The Ministry of Finance noted that in 2012 – 2014, the additional debt reached Rp 798 trillion, while in the 2015 – 2017 period the additional debt reached Rp 1,329.9 trillion.
