Beyond formal politics : party factionalism and leadership in post-authoritarian Indonesia

Abstract

This dissertation presents a study of party factionalism in post-Soeharto. It particularly focuses on the dynamics of internal conflicts in three major parties, the Golkar Party, PDI-P (the Indonesian Democratic Party for Struggle) and PAN (the National Mandate Party). The study focuses on the character, the determinants and the impact of internal factionalism on party performance and, in a broader context, on the process of democratic consolidation in Indonesia. Since much of the analysis of political parties in post-authoritarian Indonesia has focused on formal aspects, this research, by contrast concentrates on the informal aspects of political parties and broadening the analysis beyond structural issues, to the interpersonal relationships that occur outside the official roles and rules of a party. This study argues that factional turmoil within parties has been the key to understanding the stage of party's development in Indonesia. I contend that neither structural nor informal approaches alone can explain party factionalism in Indonesia. The comparison of cases taken from three parties concludes that party factionalism was caused by a mixture of factors in both formal and informal spheres of politics. It includes the party and electoral system, party patronage and leadership style. I propose the following classifications of party factions in Indonesia: the Personalised factions, and the Pseudo-Institutionalised factions. The case studies indicate that the first type of faction is more enduring than the second type. It is the informal and less ideologically driven factions which are more enduring than the more formal ones. Hence, it implies that informal political clientelism is more important as the foundation of factional movement, than ideas and formal relations. Discussing the effect of party factionalism on party performance, this study emphasizes that party factionalism is double-edged. On the one hand, party factions destabilise party organisations since they facilitate politicians in advancing their personal interest at the expense of the organisational development of the party. On the oth1r hand, party factionalism provides the adaptive function of parties that is central for political parties in dealing with changing political circumstances. This study finds that the character of factionalism in the three parties indicates two major phenomena: pragmatism drives party politicians, and the strong informal political activities outweigh formal relations. In other words, the major parties are entrenched in informal patronage networks, are elite dominated and controlled by politicians who tend to detach the public from the political process. Thus, while on its surface, political activities since changed the shape of political institutions to a more democratic outlook, the dynamics beneath the political surface continued to show undemocratic practice.