The study of political parties in the parliamentary arena in Indonesia is in its infancy. This has led to various assumptions about the way parties act in the House of People's Representatives (Dewan Perwakilan Rakyat, or DPR) that are based on scanty evidence and are heavily influenced by hostile attitudes to the DPR common in the media and the NGO community. The paper argues that, contrary to assertions that central party leaders exercise strict discipline over their members in parliament, coordination between party and caucuses, or fraksi, is weak, inconsistent and ad hoc. The paper concludes that this situation is facilitated by the eschewing of public votes through the process of decision making by ‘consensus’, a practice that is actually a vote by fraksi leaders to the exclusion of ordinary members.
CareyJohn (2005), ‘Political institutions, competing principals and party unity in legislative voting’, Institute of Governmental Studies, University of California, Berkeley, CA, website: http://escholarship.org/uc/itern/7zq7k5wb.
2.
DjadijonoM (2007), ‘Fraksi, Recalling dan Performance Wakil Rakyat’ [Fraction, recalling and performance of the member of parliament], Analisis CSIS, Vol 36, No 2.
3.
TanJohnson Paige (2002), ‘Anti-party reaction in Indonesia: Causes and implications’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, Vol 24, No 3, pp 484–508.
4.
TanJohnson Paige (2006), ‘Indonesia seven years after Soeharto: Party system institutionalization in a new democracy’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, Vol 28, No 1, pp 88–114.
5.
KatzRichardMairPeter (1995), ‘Changing models of party organization and party democracy: The emergence of the cartel party’, Party Politics, Vol 1, No 1, pp 5–28.
6.
KingDwight (2003), Half-Hearted Reform: Electoral Institutions and the Struggle for Democracy in Indonesia, Praeger Press, Westport, CT.
7.
KnappAndrew (2002), ‘France: Never a golden age’, in WebbPaulFarrellDavidHallidayIan, eds, Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
8.
KooleRuud (1996), ‘Cadre, catch-all or cartel? A comment on the notion of the cartel party’, Party Politics, Vol 2, No 4, pp 507–523.
9.
LiddleWilliamMujaniSaiful (2007), ‘Leadership, party and religion: Explaining voter behaviour in Indonesia’, Comparative Political Studies, Vol 40, No 7, pp 832–857.
10.
LiddleWilliamMujaniSaiful (2010), ‘Voters and the new Indonesian democracy’, in AspinallE.MietznerM., eds, Problems of Democratisation in Indonesia: Elections, Institutions and Society, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore.
11.
LongleyLawrenceHazanReuven (2007), The Uneasy Relationships Between Parliamentary Members and Leaders, Taylor and Francis, Abingdon.
12.
MainwaringScottScullyTimothy (1995), Building Democratic Institutions: Party Systems in Latin America, Stanford University Press, Palo Alto, CA.
13.
MietznerMarcus (2007), ‘Party financing in post-Soeharto Indonesia: Between state subsidies and political corruption’, Contemporary Southeast Asia, Vol 29, No 2, pp 238–263.
QvortrupMatt (2011), ‘Hasta la vista: A comparative institutionalist analysis of the recall’, Representation, Vol 47, No 2, pp 161–170.
16.
RobisonRichardHadizVedi (2004), Reorganising Power in Indonesia: The Politics of Oligarchy in an Age of Markets, Routledge Curzon, London and New York.
17.
SherlockStephen (2003), Struggling to Change: The Indonesian Parliament in an Era of Reformasi, Centre for Democratic Institutions, ANU, Canberra.
18.
SherlockStephen (2007), The Indonesian Parliament after Two Elections: What has Really Changed? CDI Policy Papers, 2007/1, Centre for Democratic Institutions, ANU, Canberra.
19.
SherlockStephen (2008), ‘Parties and decision-making in the Indonesian Parliament: A case study of the pornography bill’, Australian Journal of Asian Law, Vol 10, No 2, pp 159–183.
20.
SherlockStephen (2010), ‘The parliament in Indonesia's decade of democracy: People's forum or chamber of cronies?’ in AspinallE.MietznerM., eds, Problems of Democratisation in Indonesia: Elections, Institutions and Society, Institute of Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore.
21.
SlaterDan (2004), ‘Indonesia's accountability trap: Party cartels and presidential power after democratic transition’, Indonesia, Vol 78 (October), pp 61–92.
22.
SlaterDan (2006), ‘The ironies of instability in Indonesia’, Social Analysis, Vol 50, No 1, pp 208–213.
23.
TomsaDirk (2008), Party Politics and Democratization in Indonesia: Golkar in the Post-Suharto Era, Routledge, London and New York.
24.
TomsaDirk (2010), ‘The Indonesian party system after the 2009 elections: Towards stability?’ in AspinallE.MietznerM., eds, Problems of Democratisation in Indonesia: Elections, Institutions and Society, Institute for Southeast Asian Studies, Singapore.
25.
UfenAndreas (2006), Political Parties in Post-Suharto Indonesia: Between politik aliran and ‘Philippinisation’, GIGA Working Papers, No 37, GIGA, Hamburg.
26.
UfenAndreas (2008a), ‘Political party and party system institutionalization in Southeast Asia: Lessons for democratic consolidation in Indonesia, the Philippines and Thailand’, The Pacific Review, Vol 21, No 3, pp 327–350.
27.
UfenAndreas (2008b), ‘From aliran to dealignment: Political parties in post-Suharto Indonesia’, South East Asia Research, Vol 16, No 1, pp 5–41.
28.
WebbPaulFarrellDavidHallidayIan, eds (2002), Political Parties in Advanced Industrial Democracies, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
29.
WebbPaulWhiteStephen (2007), Party Politics in New Democracies, Oxford University Press, Oxford.
30.
ZiegenhainPatrick (2009), ‘The Indonesian legislature and its impact on democratic consolidation’, in BünteMarcoUfenAndreas, eds, Democratization in Post-Suharto Indonesia, Routledge, London and New York.
