Hadianto Wirajuda*

In December Bali will host its first democracy forum -- Bali Democracy Forum. Its goal is to nurture the practice of good governance between Asia Pacific countries. It will address democracy's best practices as shown by countries successful in its application.

The initiative to organize this forum came from Indonesia. This is not an odd idea because Indonesia has proven itself to be a reliable bearer of democratic wisdom as it is the world's third largest democracy after India and the United States.

Another important point is that Indonesia has managed to be a successful test case as to whether or not democracy can actually coexist with Islam. The purpose of this writing is not to argue these two successful achievements of Indonesia but rather to raise another intriguing but important question: How can democracy be ensured to be well-practiced in Indonesia?

Whenever democracy is being discussed, one must include its necessary parameters, such as a free press, free and fair elections, belief in political and civil rights and most importantly -- strong state institutions.

Unlike Afghanistan and Iraq where the state infrastructures are being devastated by war, Indonesia has experienced devastation in a different way. It did not involve foreign military occupations, but it came as a result of the 1997 Asian financial crisis which led to its political turmoil.

At the beginning of reformasi, as experienced elsewhere by a transitional government, Indonesia suffered from a condition where the state's institutions were perceived as weak and ineffective. This can be caused by several factors such as the existence of power fragmentation and divisive nationalism -- especially if it relates to ethnicity and religion.

The fragmentation of power -- based on religion or ethnicity -- was a major issue in Indonesia. Theoretically, it occurs when old institutions have been eroded and new ones have only partially developed. The contemporary illustration is corruption. The Corruption Perception Index issued by Transparency International indicates an improvement in the government's efforts to combat corruption. But although there is a significant improvement, it does not necessarily mean that the state's institutions are strong. Not at all!

Consider the House of Representatives (DPR) as an example. In a democratic regime, parliament is seen as a check-and-balance institution for government decisions. The division of power is pretty clear: Parliament is the legislator and government is the executor.

However, this balance appears to be biased. Often parliament has given the impression that it is a trade-off institution rather than a controlling institution because its bribery traffic is likely to be high.

Another focal point that highlights Indonesia's democratization is the representation of ideas in policy making which inevitably creates an interplay between transparency and fair access of public information.

Indonesia's stance on the Sept. 11 tragedy can be considered as reflecting the majority of its population, which is Islamic. The majority of Muslims here condemned the terrorist acts. Indonesians also proved that Islam and democracy are compatible.

What do all these illustrations say to us?

First, to directly answer the question raised above, democracy can only live long if the state's institutions are strong. The fact that corruption is still wandering around the state's pillars and halls -- and particularly the parliament as the people's representative body has yet to be seen as a mandatory and responsible pillar of democracy -- would mean that Indonesia's balance of power is interrupted and in turn, places Indonesia as an immature democracy for the time being.

The power fragmentation that happened in the early age of reformasi should now be mended amongst the stakeholders because divisive nationalism based on ethnicity and religion will not contribute anything to institutional solidity.

Second, the government needs to bear in mind that democracy is about the majority. In its every policy, the government needs to ensure that no interest of the majority is being injured and that every decision should take into account the public ideas of the majority. But the government is also obliged to protect the interests of the minority.

Holding not only a direct presidential election but other elections, and the coexistence between Islam and democracy should project the country's value abroad as a successful test case of a political transition from authoritarian to democratic regime.

Next month in Bali Indonesia needs to share its experiences of transforming itself into the world's third largest democracy after India and the United States.

The writer is a University of Birmingham graduate and currently is a PhD student in International Relations Department at the London School of Economics and Political Science (LSE), London, (From : The Jakarta Post)