But these are not the only faults of Widodo. Unlike his predecessors, Widodo has failed to act as a guardian of Indonesia’s democracy. According to the Democracy Index, a highly respected annual survey conducted by the Economist Intelligence Unit, from the beginning of the Widodo presidency Indonesia has been ranked as one of the world’s worst performers in terms of democratic backsliding. Indeed, the survey captures the realities Indonesians have faced over recent years: democratic norms and institutions have been undermined, the media has been bullied into remaining uncritical of the government, and the government has weaponized harsh laws on defamation and blasphemy to silence its critics.
Widodo’s story is rich with irony: he become president because Indonesia had turned democratic, but when he was in power, he started a systematic effort to weaken democratic institutions and practices.
In the final analysis, the Widodo administration has single-handedly turned back the clock on Indonesian politics by 25 years. Even more damning is the fact that, unlike Suharto, his time in office has seen the emergence of dynastic politics. Widodo’s two sons, Gibran and Kaesang, and even his son-in-law Bobby Nasution, have big political ambitions. Gibran is now the mayor of Surakarta, Kaesang has announced his intention to run for political office, and Bobby is the mayor of Medan. It is known that they harbor ambitions for running for even more powerful positions in the future, all of which suggest the Widodo family is looking to build a family empire.
During last year’s G-20 summit on the island of Bali, Widodo took advantage of his being the host by taking front stage and trumpeting Indonesia’s achievements as a democracy. Nothing could be farther from the truth. While Indonesia is indeed an electoral democracy, it is now semi-authoritarian in practice. Such is Widodo’s legacy. (Ach/Dplt)
