The Dominance Of Chairman Is Considered To Be The Cause Of Political Parties' Leadership Crisis

PHOTO ILLUSTRATION/ANTARA/Ampelsa

YOGYAKARTA - The Advisory Board of the Center for Constitutional Law Studies (PSHK) of the Faculty of Law of the Indonesian Islamic University (UII) Yogyakarta Jamaludin Ghofur assesses that the dominance of the chairperson's power has triggered political parties in Indonesia to experience a leadership crisis.

"The majority of political parties in the reform era are now experiencing a leadership crisis because of too much dependence on big charismatic figures, where the life and death of the party is very dependent on the figure of the general chairman," said Jamaludin Ghofur while delivering a scientific speech at an open meeting of the Senate in the framework of the 80th anniversary UII in Sleman Regency as reported by ANTARA, Monday, February 20.

According to Jamaludin, one of the challenges and difficulties in building a modern and professional party organization is the too strong or dominant position of political party leaders.

Because of that, he said, the powers of general chairpersons in political parties need to be reduced in the future and simply be positioned like a manager.

"It is enough to be positioned like a manager whose job is only to be responsible for planning, organizing, and managing and carrying out party activities," he said.

Important political party decisions, continued Jamaludin, must be taken through joint deliberations involving all administrators and if possible, involve all members.

"For the long term, a healthy and modern party cannot rely solely on charismatic leadership," he said.

Jamaludin said that winning the election is a requirement to become a big party, but it has not met the requirements to build a modern party.

Efforts to build modern political parties, he said, can only be achieved when each party is able to get out of various crisis threats, including one of which is a leadership crisis.

He said Article 15 paragraph (1) of Law Number 2 of 2011 concerning political parties has emphasized that sovereignty within the party lies in the hands of the members.

However, said Jamaludin, in fact, the formulation of strategic party policies, in general, is still fully controlled by party elites.

"Even in certain contexts it only becomes the exclusive right of a person's chairman, while members are mere spectators," he said.

He considered that the implementation of leadership succession within political parties also did not reflect democratization within political parties, and even contradicted the spirit of reform.

The spirit of reform which limits the period of power in all strategic positions such as president, governor, regent, and mayor, namely a maximum of two terms, according to him, is not found in political party organizations.

According to him, most political parties are actually led by general chairmen without any term limit at all.

"Several parties have been led by a general chairman for more than two terms, and there have even been parties that have never changed their leadership since their establishment," said Jamaludin Ghofur.