One of the most compelling aspects of the Indonesian electoral process in 1999 was the vital role played by civil society. Beyond the official structures of government—outside the authority of the Komisi Pemilihan Umum (KPU), their version of our Commission on Elections—it was the civil society organizations, universities, faith-based groups, and volunteers that breathed life into the democratic machinery.
As a volunteer of NAMFREL myself, I saw in Forum Rektor, Indonesia’s counterpart, not just a partner, but a reflection of our own journey. These were people who had never before been given such a powerful role in shaping a national democratic exercise, yet they stepped into the responsibility with a sense of ownership and deep patriotism. They understood that the integrity of elections is not the sole duty of governments; it is the collective commitment of the governed.
Our team was frequently guided and supported by local Forum Rektor volunteers, who helped us navigate polling precincts, interpret community dynamics, and even make sense of the nuances in how local traditions intertwined with the formalities of voting. These were educators, students, researchers—people who were not career politicians or seasoned bureaucrats, yet had chosen to invest their time, knowledge, and integrity to ensure the election’s success.
In Jember, for instance, I saw how community elders, local clerics, and even market vendors were all engaged in disseminating correct information. They encouraged voters to go to the polls, reminded neighbors of the proper conduct, and even policed their own neighborhoods to prevent any attempts at vote-buying or intimidation. It was democracy in motion, practiced not just inside the polling centers but in the very fabric of community life.
This reinforced for me the irreplaceable role of civil society in any credible democratic process. It is easy to think of elections as purely institutional undertakings, administered by commissions and watched over by party agents. But the truth is, no government—no matter how well-resourced—can guarantee clean elections without the participation and vigilance of the people.
In the Philippines, NAMFREL has long played this role. But our challenge has always been sustainability—how to keep citizen engagement alive beyond election seasons. Indonesia reminded me that civil society must be nurtured continuously, not just activated periodically. When people see their role as permanent stakeholders, rather than seasonal participants, democracy becomes more resilient.
Moreover, the credibility of civil society depends on its independence and inclusiveness. In Indonesia, we witnessed a deliberate effort to ensure that observer groups were composed of people from different walks of life—young and old, religious and secular, men and women. This diversity added moral weight to their efforts and lent greater legitimacy to the results.
We would do well to take note. As our own elections become increasingly complex and digitized, we must remember that no machine or software can substitute for the human spirit. Integrity, vigilance, and a deep sense of civic duty—these remain the strongest safeguards against fraud, coercion, and indifference.
At the heart of it, civil society is not just a sector; it is a soul. It is the soul of a democracy determined not to fail itself.
No comments:
Post a Comment