The Constitutional Court's ruling on the distribution of legislative seats late last month deserves applause, as it basically curbs the power of the party system and instead allows for the clear articulation of the voices of voters, the people. But when it comes to implementation, the ruling may create problems.
With Law No. 10/2008 on legislative elections, the court has ruled that seats in the nation's legislatures will go to the candidates who secure the most votes in the election.
It therefore nullifies article 214 of a 2008 law which granted political party leaders the authority to unilaterally hand-pick their close supporters as party representatives in national and regional legislatures.
The Court's ruling, though democratic in nature, is not enough to make the upcoming elections a true feast of democracy. The ruling could potentially create problems because it does not consider the 2.5 percent national eligibility threshold required for a political party to be represented in the legislature.
Thus, if a candidate wins the most votes in one district, it is not yet certain if he/she would get the seat at the legislature, especially if his/her party fails to collect the necessary 2.5 percent of votes.
The court's ruling also goes against the spirit of giving women a greater role in politics. It runs counter to article 55 of the same law that the Constitutional Court has examined (Law No. 10/2008), which stipulates that at least one in every three legislative candidates nominated by each political party must be a woman.
Some parties have deliberately put women candidates high on their ballots in the hope that they will win seats. But, with the court's ruling, the placing of female candidates at the top of lists is no longer relevant.
No wonder women's rights activists are furious with the ruling, saying that it negates their long struggle for a 30-percent quota of women in legislatures.
Furthermore, the court's ruling seems to mean that the upcoming election will work using the district system, while the basic laws of the upcoming election system are in fact a combination of both the district and proportional system.
Thus, without recognizing the spirit of the election laws, the Constitutional Court's decision is a mere disruption to the heating-up election process. This creates complications for the General Elections Commission (KPU), as it carries a number of technical problems. Up until now, for example, the KPU and party contestants differed on how the balloting system should work, namely, whether voters should be allowed to choose both a political party and a candidate.
As the April 2009 legislative election is fast approaching, the KPU needs to tackle these basic and technical problems with haste. There is a plan by the President to issue government regulations in lieu of the law (Perpu), in order to cover the technical loopholes following the issuance of the court's ruling.
As the ruling is binding in nature, it is suggested that the Constitutional Court revoke other contradictory articles in each of the three political laws – Law No. 2/2008 on political parties, Law No. 10/2008 on the legislative election and Law No. 42/2008 on the presidential and vice presidential election.
Articles that should be revoked include article 16 (1d) of the political party law, which grants every political party the right to "recall" any of its members from the legislature if he/she goes against the party's lines. As legislators are determined by the number of votes they receive, not by their number on the list set by the party, giving the parties the right to recall cadres from the parliament becomes irrelevant.
If this is not possible because of time constraints then the government and KPU must work harder to ensure that the implementation of the court's ruling does not create problems in the future and will not hinder the preparation process for the elections.
In the longer term, the government and the future House of Representatives – that results from the upcoming elections – should think of the ways to make our democracy work better, including through better election processes – be they a combination of district and proportional system or a pure district system.
The most important thing is to make the voters, the people, and not the political parties the true deciders of the elections. As a result, our legislators would truly represent the people and not their parties.