Waves of mass demonstrations have swept the Indonesia in the past two months. In February, demonstrators of Papua in Sumatra gathered to protest against the free meal measures of President Prabowo Suubianto and “efficiency”, asked for an affordable education and protection of academic freedom, and called on the government to listen to “the people” (rayat). Online and offline, thousands used the slogan #Indonesiagelap (#Darkindonesia) to express their dissatisfaction. These demonstrations mean continuation of the demonstrations of August from last year, which gathered around the slogan #Peringatandandurat (#Emmergencyalert) and rejected a controversial legal amendment which would have enabled the son of the president (now former) Joko Widodo to present himself to the Governor’s elections.
More recently, since March 19, demonstrators have been descending into the streets of Jakarta, Bandung, Yogyakarta, Surabaya, Malang, Karawang, Banda Aceh, Padang, Samarinda, and many other cities to reject the amendment to law n ° 34/2004 on the national military (UU TNI). On March 20, the amendment was adopted in Parliament, widening the role of the military in the government and risking erosion of the principle of civil supremacy. As of March 29, demonstrations took place in at least 72 cities. From April 7, a group of demonstrators held a small camp in front of one of the gates of the Parliament, before being dispersed by the police on April 9.
While clearly rejecting attempts to erode democratic norms, these recent demonstrations also dispute the own conception of the government of democracy.
Despite the democratic decline in the last decade, Indonesian politicians and civil servants have never openly denounced democracy. In fact, they often boast of Indonesia status as a democracy and claim to respect the democratic rights of their criticism. Improving democracy is officially part of the country’s long -term development plan since 2005, and the central statistics agency has built its own democracy index. Even Prabowo himself, who was accused of having committed serious human rights violations during the dictatorship of Suharto, claims to support democracy. In his inauguration speech in October, he mentioned the word “democracy” no less than 15 times.
However, the current Indonesian government has a particular, although implicit conception of democracy: that in which there are limited criticism and calm. Although Prabowo claimed to support democracy in his inauguration speech, he described what Indonesians needed is a “polished democracy” (Demokrasi Yang Santun) It is “unique to Indonesia”. In February, responding to the song of the Sukatani group “Bayar, Bayar, Bayar”, which criticized the omnipresence of corruption within the police organization, the Minister of Cultural Affairs Fadli Zon declared that freedom of expression had its limits. He suggested that criticism should avoid offending entire institutions (as opposed to individuals) with their criticism. And while Prabowo said on several occasions that he welcomes criticism, he made fun and rejected criticism from his policies.
For example, in a speech during the event of the 17th anniversary of the Géritra party, Prabowo used the word “ndasmu“(Direct translation:” your head “) to express his disgust for criticisms of the size of his office. In another speech, this time at the 6th Congress of the Democratic Party, Prabowo responded to the #Darkindonia demonstrations with a little laugh, saying: “Who sees a black of Indonesia? Instead of carefully attacking the substance of manifestations.
Government resistance from different points of view stems from its idealization of a homogeneous and “united” people. On February 9, National Indonesian press day, Prabowo, congratulated the press contribution to democracy, but reminded journalists that they should “always prioritize the national interest” and avoid sowing “hatred and distrust”. On February 15, he warned of “foreign agents” (Antek Asing) Who wish to divide the people through the media and non -governmental organizations.
The importance of the unit for Prabowo was made obvious when he invited the editors of several media organizations for a six -hour meeting at his home on February 22. In his article on X, he expressed his hopes that Reunion “would strengthen the synergy and the contribution of the media to the development of the country”. And in a 3 -hour interview he held with six journalists at his home last Sunday, April 6, he alleged that many demonstrators were funded by foreign agents.
This is nothing new; Prabowo has supervised dissident opinions in this way on numerous occasions, going back well before his presidency. In a speech he delivered in June 2014, during his first campaign for the presidency, he declared that direct elections were part of Western culture and unsuitable for Indonesia, and suggested that there should be “a new consensus”. Then, a few months after his elections last year, he suggested removing direct elections for regional governors, regents and mayors, and instead of delegating their selection to regional legislatures.
The last two months of demonstrations have sought to challenge these stories, online and offline, through signs of protest, banners and publications on social networks, and to challenge the limits of democracy that the government has tried to set. For example, the cooption of the concept of politeness, demonstrators and Internet users has supervised the lack of transparency of the government and public consultation in the development of policies, as well as its development of harmful policies, as “impolie”.
The argument that the opposition and dissent are an integral part of democracy directly questions the government’s preference for “politeness” and “civility”. Rejecting the importance of order and calm above all, the demonstrators argued that they deserve to be angry and disruptive when their voices are not heard. They also said that government representatives are not leaders, but rather servants that people pay by their tax. Questions about the lines of “which represents the Parliament” – a recurring question dating from the Presidency of Prabowo – demonstrates a consciousness on the continuous nature of political representation. From this point of view, democracy does not end with the conclusion of the elections. Some have also emphasized democracy as a process, where public participation of the public is valued in itself. This calls into question the government’s trend to center elections as “democratic festivals” (Pesta Demokrasi).
The repression against the idealization by the government of a united and calm democratic policy shows how the definition of democracy itself has become a field of political protest. Given the positive connotation that the term “democracy” has, politicians with authoritarian tendencies can find it preferable to define democracy in a way that suits their interests rather than rejecting it.
This is obvious in the case of Indonesia; Since democracy is a popular word, claiming that “democracy” can give politicians legitimacy. Contents these borders and recovering the meaning of democracy are therefore critical political acts not only to defend democracy against erosion, but also to renegotiate and extend its scope. In recent weeks, slogans such as “People help people, “ Open donations of food and water for demonstrators and donations to support victims of police brutality, medical positions to help demonstrators need medical aid, among other things, both in solidarity and to expose gaps in the “polished” design of Prabowo democracy.