TEMPO.CO, Jakarta - There is cause for relief from last week's Jakarta gubernatorial election: voters were not influenced by sectarian issues. Under the shadow of the massive protests of November 4 and December 2 last year, Basuki Tjahaja Purnama (Ahok), according to the General Elections Commission (KPU), came first with 43 percent of the vote. Ahok was accused of blasphemy for quoting the Qur'an in a speech at the Thousand Islands last September. As a result, he is facing criminal charges.
The two other candidates, Anies Baswedan and Agus Harimurti Yudhoyono, garnered 40 percent and 17 percent of the vote, respectively. Agus was eliminated from the contest. Ahok and Anies will go on to contest the second round, which will take place in April.
An exit poll organized by the Indikator Politik provides more details about the impact of the religion issue in this election. Only 13 percent of those who voted for Anies did so because he was seen as 'doing the most to fight for religion'. Another two percent voted for him in response to the advice from religious figures. With Agus, five percent of his voters chose him because they believed he was 'doing the most to fight for religion', and one percent in response to the advice from religious figures. One percent of Ahok's vote was due to religious reasons, presumably Christians who voted for a candidate who shared their faith.
These figures show the small numbers who voted because of this personal issue. Multiplied by the votes for each candidate, it is believed that only 7 percent of voters made their choices based on religious reasons. The other 93 percent voted on the basis of the candidates' capabilities, their honesty, their programs or for other reasons.
This is something of an anticlimax given the events of the last five months. In a noisy campaign, the election divided voters based on religion or ethnicity. The incumbent was under the spotlight not for his achievements or failures when leading Jakarta, but because he was a 'non-Muslim' status he has had since birth. Talk of his success in reducing flooding or his error in the Jakarta north coast reclamation project to give one good and one bad example were swamped by this question of identity. His two opponents competed to identify themselves as Islamic to distinguish themselves from 'the antagonist'.
There is, of course, no law against using religion as a reason to elect a leader. In any case, religion is a part of voters' subjectivity. But problems arise when religious sentiment is used to attack opponents. What Ahok said at Thousand Islands whether it went against public ethics or not, was not blasphemy. The debate before the judges between Ahok and his attorney and K.H. Ma'ruf Amin, chairman of the Indonesian Council of Ulamas (MUI), was a proper legal debate that was in no way intended to denigrate a religion.
This use of religion to seek electoral gain must not happen in the second round of the gubernatorial election. Bad campaigning that attacks candidates based on their religion or ethnicity must be a thing of the past.
The two candidates should focus on their work programs and ideas. For example, Basuki and his running mate, Djarot Saiful Hidayat, could campaign on their proposals for a Jakarta Smart Card, improvements to river banks and the development of mass rapid transport. Anies Baswedan and Sandiaga Uno could put forward their ideas of empowering small businesses, providing for home purchases without down-payments and for development without evictions.
In the second round, we hope that there are exchanges and arguments over ideas on the best way to develop Jakarta. For example, Ahok's reclamation and relocation of poor people contravene the fair development proposals announced by Anies.
Assuming he can control his supporters, Agus Harimurti and the parties backing him could play a significant role in the second round. Agus, who proposed giving rolling payments of Rp1 billion to every citizen communities (RW), could offer this idea to another candidate as a condition of transferring support.
The temptation to do battle by using ethnic or religious sentiment must be abandoned. As a member of the majority, Anies does not need to overplay his hand. Conversely, Ahok, as a member of the minority, should act normally. The data from the first round show the wisdom of Jakarta's people: they don't buy cheap issues such as race, religion or faction. (*)
Read the full story in this week's edition of Tempo English Magazine
