In January 2016, discussions were set to begin on legislative frameworks related to elections, covering four key laws: legislative elections, presidential elections, regional head elections, and election management bodies. Elections are a strategic arena for political contestation as well as for public participation in advancing people’s interests. So far, however, elections have largely been designed as a mechanism for selecting leaders within a framework of leadership succession. Much needs to be reinterpreted and reformulated to ensure that public participation remains open and meaningful in articulating collective interests. Elections should not be treated as separate from everyday political life, especially when it comes to how resources are allocated and distributed from the state to citizens. It must also be acknowledged that oligarchic forces have significant opportunities to channel and restrict participation through technical engineering of electoral rules, potentially reducing elections to a merely pragmatic and procedural exercise. This includes efforts such as shifting to a closed-list system, simplifying the number of political parties, and tightening eligibility requirements for participation.
This workshop addresses three main areas of discussion related to political representation and elections in Indonesia, with the aim of influencing the formulation of electoral regulations. The following are the key points for discussion.
Discussion 1
Political representation produced through elections can never fully capture the diversity of interests and identities; it can only do so partially. Representation is therefore a matter of claims rather than a complete reflection of reality. This raises an important question: which political parties today truly represent the identities of workers, farmers, women, and marginalized groups such as the urban poor and people with disabilities? Beyond identity, their interests are often absent from formal political representation. The current choices of parties and candidates are limited. Electoral regulations should therefore create broader opportunities for participation, candidacy, and contestation that allow diverse identities and interests to emerge. What recommendations can social movements and the public offer regarding eligibility requirements for election participation? How should the idea of local political parties be approached?
Discussion 2
Democratic political representation exists when those affected by decisions have the capacity to influence how those decisions are made. Elections should function as a process for aggregating public interests, not merely as a mechanism for selecting leaders. This is essential to ensure that the absence of truly representative parties, leaders, or legislators does not result in the neglect of public interests within political processes. Elections must be reimagined as a bridge connecting the formulation and planning of public agendas with their implementation after the electoral moment. The key question, then, is how the stages of elections can be restructured to become more participatory and better facilitate the aggregation of people’s interests.
Discussion 3
Claims of political representation can emerge from both electoral and non-electoral processes. Electoral processes generate formal representation within executive and legislative institutions. Non-electoral processes, on the other hand, produce representation through social and political movements, labor unions, community groups, and civil society organizations. It is therefore necessary to build relationships, whether antagonistic or collaborative, to advance the interests that have been aggregated and agreed upon. What strategies can be developed to make this possible?
These three discussions should serve as a starting point for rethinking politics, political participation, and political representation within the broader framework of elections.
