Seminar Report The role of Political Parties in Democratic Transitions

Establishing Multiparty Dialogues
Multiparty dialogues have been essential in many countries to help build consensus and trust, promote
reconciliation and solidify democratic transitions. While parties compete at elections they also need to
work together. What principles do the parties share in common? What are essential to all parties to
perform their democratic function?
Negotiating Space for Democratic Politics
The relationship between the state (government, army, institutions) and citizens and political actors is
being fundamentally redefined in a democratic transition. Hence there is a need to define the role of
the army, of the state and of the citizens anew.
Parties to respond to voters expectations both with regard to Representation and Delivery
Political parties are ultimately vehicles to reflect the diversity of the country, to respond to voter
expectations and help make life better for citizens in practical ways. It is not enough to make
promises, People also want to see real improvements in their livelihoods and freedoms.
The presentation was followed by a discussion where many questions and reflections were voiced.
Participants wondered about: How the cooperation with local government could be improved in order to
better deliver results for the communities? How other countries had ensured a level playing field where
there are two dominant parties? How conflicts can be resolved through dialogue? How to make parties
more democratic within their own structures?
Mr Tom Cormier stressed that many of the issues also persists in other countries – not only Myanmar –
and the search for better solutions continues. In this respect, democracy always needs investment in
building your party, in having dialogue also with your opponents, in defining the role of the military, in
finding development paths that will truly benefit in particular the rural areas.
1.4. Summary Presentation on “Experiences and Inspiration from a successful transition to
Democracy: the case of Indonesia”
By Dr Ignas Kleden, Chairperson of the Kommunitas Indonesia untuk Demokrasi (KID)
Discussant: Mr Aung Naing Oo, Director, Vahu Development Institute
In this presentation Dr Ignas Kleden described the transition or ‘rediscovery’ of democracy in Indonesia
through different periods. He emphasized that in his view, during Indonesia’s path to democracy there is
so far no evidence that political parties have played a significant role. Only between 1950-1952, when
Indonesia implemented liberal democracy, many parties were set up to demonstrate that democracy was
developing and thriving. This was an instable period, consensus was almost unreachable because of
fractions in parliament. There were frequent changes of cabinets and frequent and rising tensions
between the president and the vice-president.
Dr Ignas Kleden then outlined the developments during the following periods:
Guided democracy period (1957-1965)
The political parties had no power during Soekarno’s rule. During this period there was no attention for
economic policies, there was food shortage and inflation went up to 600%.
New order period (1967-1998)
After a period of military rule, Suharto was elected as president in 1967. Main features of the Sukarno
period were: unbridled competition between political parties that led to instability, neglect of economic
affairs and the concentration of power in one hand. The party Golkar was established by the president
as the sole active political party. Political opposition was officially ruled out because “conflict was
contradictory to the Indonesian culture of harmony”. Media during that time had “freedom with
responsibility”, a concept never elaborated upon which made many journalists uncertain.
6