instance, in communities where women’s roles as politicians and decision-makers are not well accepted, women face strong cultural barriers entering local governments.
Furthermore, women in local governments may have to overcome institutional barriers. In many cases, male-dominated political parties are not willing to involve women in their
local branches and, subsequently, in local politics. Most local governments are inherently patriarchal institutions. Their structures and procedures are designed for and by men and
they do not take into account women’s multiple responsibilities in their homes and communities, or differences of communications and decision-making styles existing
between men and women.
Decentralization processes, as part of strategies for effective governance, should aim to ensure greater transparency, accountability, consultation and participation in
decision making at local levels. But, a major challenge in decentralization processes - whether driven from the top or from the bottom - is the management of competing needs
and demands of different groups in society.
Local law making process is not occur in a vacuum; men’s interest and women’s interest must be also brought along in the process. Resistance from men can be strong
when women compete for power in the public sphere, or when the rights, and privileges of men within the family are questioned.
Gender equality should, however, not be seen simply as a zero-sum game where gains by women automatically imply losses for men. There are gains from gender
equality, for men, as well as for families, households and communities and society at large, which need to be better understood.
II.3 Quota Sys
tem as an Alternative to Increase Women’s Representation
Take a lessons learned from another countries Indonesia try to addopt and implement women’s quota as a ‘fast track’ strategy to increase women’s representation.
Quotas for women entail that women must constitute a certain number or percentage of the members of a body, whether it is a candidate list, a parliamentary
assembly, a committee or a government. Quotas aim at increasing women’s representation in publicly elected or appointed institutions such as governments,
parliaments and local councils. Gender quotas draw legitimacy from the discourse of
exclusion, according to which the main reasons for women’s under-representation are the exclusionary practices of the political parties and the political institutions at large. Quotas
place the burden of candidate recruitment not on the individual woman, but on those who control the recruitment process, first and foremost the political parties.1 Quotas force
those who nominate and select to start recruiting women and give women a chance which they do not have today in most parts of the world.
In general, quotas for women represent a shift from one concept of equality to another. The classic liberal notion of equality was a notion of ‘equal opportunity’ or
‘competitive equality’. Removing the formal barriers, for example, giving women voting rights, was considered sufficient. The rest was up to the individual women. Following
strong feminist pressure in the last few decades, a second concept of equality is gaining increasing relevance and support
—the notion of ‘equality of result’. The argument is that just removing formal barriers does not produce real equal opportunity. Direct
discrimination, as well as a complex pattern of hidden barriers, prevents women from
getting their share of political influence. Quotas and other forms of active equality measures are thus a means towards equality of result.The argument is based on the
experience that equality as a goal cannot be reached by formal equal treatment as a means. If barriers exist, it is argued, compensatory measures must be introduced as a
means to reach equality of result.
Introducing women’s quota system in Indonesia is a very exhausted effort. Women activist have been advocateing this policy since 2000’s. However, it is not easy since it
provoke opposition from many groups, particularly male key decision-makers and some women’s group also.
During 2001-2003, several Indonesian womens organizations called for the introduction of a quota system for the 2004 election a minimum quota of 30 percent.
This culminated in the passage of of legislation in February 2003 requiring political parties to consider selecting 30 women candidates in each electoral district. Article 65 of the
election law stated : Each participating political party may nominate candidates for the DPR, Provincial DPRD, and RegencyCity DPRD, for each electoral district, giving
consideration to representation of women of at least 30.
In 2008, the new Election Law stressed again the important of women’s quota. The candidacy list propose
d by political parties minimaly accommodate 30 women’s candidate. There are at least one women’s candidate in every three candidate semi
zipper system in the candidacy list proposed by political parties. It is also supported by the new Political Party Law which stated that the new political parties must accomodate
30 women’s representative. There are at keat 30 women’s representation in political parties central board.
Unfortunately, at the last December 2008 the Indonesian Constitution Judiciary d
ecided that all of Indonesian member’s of parliament will be elected by the majoritarian system. It’s mean that the candidate who get the highest vote will take the seat. By the
new system, women had to ready for free fight competion, without affirmative action. It’s
a more liberal democracy practices in Indonesia. What is Indonesia public opinion for that decision ? Most of Indonesian elite,
included some women but except women activists, support that decision. Apparenly, most Indonesian elite think that women quota or affirmative action for women are like a priority
and it be in opposition to “equal opportunity” principles , so it is ‘undemocratic’ practice. It also reveals that the oppositions to the Indonesian women’s quota are very high, the
implemen tation of Indonesian women’s quota are very problematic. It is clear that many
politicians have a poor understanding of the importance of the representation of women and the importance of affirmative action.
According Newman, affirmative action is “… any race- or sex-conscious employment practices devised with the intention of redressing past racial or gender
imbalances and injustices”. The underlying assumption here is that societal injustice can only be corrected by societal compensation. These definitions capture the most common
concepts of affirmative action. They share important attributes, namely: 1 society has committed discrimination in the past against a particular group of population; 2
government has adopted an objective of eradicating discrimination; and 3 society needs to take appropriate steps to end discriminatory practices and correct the imbalances that
resulted from past discrimination. It is clear that we need to acknowledge that gender
discrimination already happened. Unlucky, most of Southeast Asian society, included politician, have no gender counciousness and think that there are no gender problems.
However, women got 18 percent House of Representative seats in 2009 Indonesian election. The table below illustrates that the highest contributor come from
Demokrat 24, the president’s party. As Demokrat is a new party, women get more acces. The presiden popularity is very significant so the presiden party Demokrat got
plentiful seat. On reverse side, women who ride other political parties, face more difficulties.
Most of elected candidate are popular public figures, such as actress, politician daughter or official’s wife. This competition spends much money, so most of elected
candidate are wealthiest women. By the highest vote system Majoritarian, most of women’s activist candidates fail. They don’t have enough money and popularity.
Nevertheless the 2009 Indonesian election result reveals the tough struggle of women. Though the quota system are not compulsory but it inspiring women to fight in politics.
Table. 2 Women in 2009-2014 Indonesian House of Representative
N O
PARTIE S
PARTY ‘S SEAT
WOMEN’S SEAT
WOMEN’S SEAT IN EACH POLITICAL
PARTIY WOMEN IN HOUSE OF
REPRESENTATIVE 1
PKB 27
7 25,93
6,93 2
Demokra t
150 37
24,67 36,63
3 PDIP
95 19
20 18,81
4 Hanura
18 3
16,67 2,97
5 Golkar
107 17
15,89 16,83
6 Gerindra
26 4
15,38 3,96
7 PAN
43 6
13,95 5,94
8 PPP
37 5
13,51 4,95
9 PKS
57 3
5,26 2,97
560 101
18,04 100
Sourcer : CETRO
III. CONCLUSION
