Indonesia's presidential democracy - a factor of stability or instability?

Más información sobre el libro

This study examines the impact of formal institutions on political output in contemporary Indonesia, highlighting significant changes following four constitutional amendments and a new election law. These alterations necessitate a renewed focus on Indonesian political research. Utilizing veto player theory, the legislative process is analyzed, encompassing crucial legislation such as the Law on the Governance of Aceh and various draft laws addressing issues like pornography, military courts, and freedom of information. The findings indicate that legislative gridlock in Indonesia stems primarily from its presidential and multiparty governmental structure. Solutions proposed include transitioning to a parliamentary democracy and establishing an effective electoral threshold to limit the number of parties in parliament. Additionally, the consensus rule in legislative decision-making should be reconsidered. However, informal behaviors—such as corruption and a politicized military—continue to plague post-Suharto politics. These informal institutions have developed over time, and the study also explores Indonesia’s historical context. With over 30 years of New Order abuses and a transition influenced by state elites, detrimental informal institutions remain entrenched, ultimately undermining the quality of Indonesia’s democracy today.