Richard Borsuk and Puspa Madani, Sleman – In a campaign that often featured unpleasant surprises, some things still went smoothly for Golkar, Indonesia's dominant party.

At a recent rally here in central Java, the crowd was big yet orderly, the band playing dangdut (Indonesian soul music) was good and the participants pledged to vote for President Suharto's political vehicle.

But Golkar support perhaps isn't as deep as its leaders want or need. Sukartini, a 32-year-old primary school teacher bused to the rally with colleagues, says she will vote Golkar Thursday but not solely because she thinks it's the best choice. "The headmaster will know if I don't vote for Golkar," she says. "I don't know how but he will."

Indonesia's violent election campaign has generated great enthusiasm – but not for the process or choices. Intended to be largely a ritual to confer legitimacy on the government, this election has instead shown that the country's tightly regulated political system needs changes, many analysts say.

Certain to win

One thing won't change after the polls close Thursday: Golkar is certain to win by a wide margin, as it has in the five parliamentary elections held since then-Gen. Suharto gained power in 1966 and built a political system called the New Order.

It's also virtually assured that Golkar, whose full name is Golongan Karya ("Functional Groups"), will get at least two-thirds of the vote. But the way the campaign has gone, Golkar could both win and lose. Some analysts assert that if Golkar reaches its remarkably precise target of 70.02% of the valid votes, many Indonesians will feel the result isn't credible.

If Golkar wins "less than 70%, people will interpret this as bad for Golkar, and its political legitimacy will fade away," says Amien Rais, outspoken leader of Muhammadiyah, Indonesia's second-largest Islamic organization. "But if Golkar gets more than 70%, people won't believe that figure."

In any case, the campaign has bolstered charges that Indonesia's political system isn't functioning well. "People are very bored with 30 years of the same system, same leaders, same game," Mr. Rais says. "Many people think it's about time to have change."

Fewer seats for military

Government officials point out there has been one change this time: Thursday's votes will fill 425 of the 500 seats in the House of Representatives, rather than 400 as in previous polls. The number of seats reserved for Indonesia's military has dropped to 75 from 100.

But government critics say this isn't meaningful reform, since the House has little power in a political system dominated by President Suharto. Moreover, critics contend, outspoken House members usually don't get another term, as they are dropped by parties from candidate-lists that the government must approve.

Martono, a Surabaya taxi driver in his late 40s, says he'd like to have his own member of the House to whom he could take complaints – something the Indonesian system doesn't have. "In the campaign, all the parties say they will help small people, but I don't know who we get to help us."

A constant complaint aired during the campaign is that Indonesia's top-down approach to governing – which functioned well in the 1970s and 1980s – no longer works because citizens are far more sophisticated than before. "This election, and process, doesn't give people a channel to feel they can be heard," says Hotman Siahaan, a sociologist at Surabaya's Airlangga University.

'Change will have to wait'

Yet few expect political reform to emerge from this election. "Change will have to wait until Suharto isn't there," an Indonesian editor says. "He built this system and he thinks it still works. So there won't be change for now."

One sign of pressure for change is that throngs of young Indonesians flouted government-imposed restrictions on processions and other campaign tactics deemed to be disruptive. "The most interesting aspect of this election has been the resistance toward Golkar and authority," says Riswandha Imawan, a political scientist at Gajah Mada University in Yogyakarta. Symbols of the state such as police stations have been "openly attacked by people who felt they've been treated unfairly."

Still, the electoral system heavily favors Golkar, which most Indonesians see as synonymous with government and the country's huge bureaucracy. An organization of civil servants helps form the backbone of Golkar, and the party is allowed to have offices in villages – a right denied to the other two permitted parties, the Muslim-based United Development Party, or PPP, and the Indonesian Democratic Party, or PDI. Golkar dominates coverage on state-run television, whose news bulletin must be shown by all six Indonesian channels. And Golkar is quietly backed by virtually all the country's major business groups. "This is part of corporate citizenship," a director of one Jakarta conglomerate explains.

Army Chief-of-Staff Gen. Hartono last year donned a yellow jacket – yellow being the Golkar color – at a function in Central Java. That upset many Indonesians because the military is traditionally neutral in the campaign. Over the past year, officials in Central Java painted buildings, bridges and even flower pots yellow in some cities.

'Yellowization' backfires

But the move has backfired, according to Mr. Riswandha. "Yellowization" and the government-backed ouster of Megawati Sukarnoputri as head of the PDI last year "has made people unhappy toward the government, which in this case can't be separated from Golkar," he says.

Even so, he believes that a "hierarchy of fear" will help Golkar get the results it wants in rural Java. Local officials who want to improve their bureaucratic careers set high targets and achieve them, he says. Golkar has campaigned much harder this time than five years ago, many observers agree. In Sleman, a district 10 kilometers from Yogyakarta, Golkar local Chairman Haerudin says the target of 66% support for Golkar will be reached in the district, compared with the 57% the party got in 1992. "We didn't do so well [in 1992] because of internal and external factors," he explains. "Now, we're solid and get sympathy from the people."

In the 1992 election, Golkar's percentage of the nationwide vote dropped to 68% from 73% in 1987. While many analysts thought this was a logical decline, given Indonesia's economic gains and growing urbanization, Golkar treated the result as a calamity. The party's chairman, Wahono, was replaced by Information Minister Harmoko, who's on the TV news almost every night as the state channel reports his activities and statements.

Stiff resistance

In this campaign, Mr. Suharto's eldest daughter, Siti Hardijanti Rukmanac, has also emerged as an effective campaigner. The 48- year-old Mrs. Rukmana, known as Tutut, is seen by some Indonesians as a contender for the nation's vice presidency next year.

But Golkar's strong push in Java has met stiff resistance. Many young Indonesians upset with Ms. Megawati's ouster have joined noisy rallies of the PPP, which has become for now a de facto opposition party. The PPP has scored points by repeatedly raising the name of Eddy Tansil in rally speeches. In 1994, the businessman was convicted of corruption charges in a scandal involving a $600 million loan from state-owned Bapindo Bank. Last year, Tansil escaped from jail after bribing prison guards. In one Jakarta rally, PPP Chairman Ismail Hasan Metareum complained that when small people commit a petty crime, they are punished unfairly but Tansil "received special treatment in prison and now our law enforcers don't know his whereabouts."

Anger about Ms. Megawati's removal and Tansil's escape should help boost PPP, which got 17% of the vote in 1992. Party officials predict they'll get at least 25%. But the PPP may win fewer votes than many Indonesians expect; big, noisy rallies don't necessarily translate into votes.

The PPP's showing hinges partly on how many Megawati supporters vote for it as a protest vote, and how many spoil their ballots or boycott the poll to show discontent.

Playing on public cynicism over the electoral system, the PPP charged recently that it had obtained a document showing that in one district in Sumatra a local official wrote a report showing the district would vote 86.29% Golkar, 7% PPP and 6.71% PDI. The Jakarta Post quoted officials as dismissing charges that the results had been rigged in advance. One official was quoted as saying the leaked report appeared to be a projection sheet from which the word "projection" had been removed.